061107 CC Reg AgP
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD' SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 . (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128' www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Executive Summary
Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting
Monday, 11 June 2007
. 5:30 p.m.- Council Work Session
Agenda Item #3A:
Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval.
Agenda Item #3B:
Staffing - No action required
Agenda Item #3C: Plans, Specifications and Estimate and Authorize Advertisement of Bids
for Lift Station 12 Rehabilitation Project are being presented for approval. A resolution
ordering the improvement, approving the plans, specifications and Engineer's estimate,
and authorizing the Advertisement for Bids is included for your consideration.
Agenda Item #5A: Excelsior Covenant Church is seeking tax-exempt financing for construction
of its school. The City of Deephaven is willing to do so on the Church's behalf. As the
project is within Shorewood, the Shorewood City Council must hold a public hearing
regarding the financing. Steve Fenlon, on behalf of the Church, will explain the
technicalities of the process for the Council. The City's bond counsel provided a
memorandum explaining the issue and noting that the City of Shorewood would have no
responsibility or exposure with the financing. Staff recommends that the Council adopt the
resolution setting the public hearing for July 9,2007, on this matter.
Agenda Item #5B: Tad Shaw, Minnetonka Community Education (MCE) representative, will
provide a report on MCE activities.
Agenda Item #5C: Patrick Hodapp, Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission
representative, will provide a report on LMCC activities.
Agenda Item #8A: Excelsior Covenant Church has requested a conditional use permit to
construct a small accessory building (this must be the year for churches to construct
accessory buildings) in the northeast corner of their property. The proposed 10' x 18'
structure will replace a somewhat smaller building in that same location. The Planning
Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the C.U.P. as presented.
......
t . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
....
Executive Summary - City Council Meeting of 11 June 2007
Page 2 of3
Agenda Item #8B: Blair and Sharon Bury have requested an amendment to the Zoning Code
that would change the requirement that swimming pools be enclosed with a four-foot
non-climbable fence. They prefer not to have to fence across the pond at the west end of
their property, even though there is an existing fence in that location now. Staff
presented research on how several communities with relatively up-to-date codes handle
such situations and recommended against the proposed change. At the meeting the
applicants provided a list of local communities that either do not require fencing, or
recognize water as a barrier that does not require a fence. After considerable discussion,
the Planning Commission recommended to deny the request for a zoning text
amendment. There was subsequent discussion about the possibility of a variance;
however, staff and the Commission expressed skepticism relative to hardship, since the
fence could easily be constructed in a location less conspicuous than the pond edge. The
applicants were offered the opportunity to amend their application to request a variance
instead of an amendment. This revision would require a new notice and return to the
Planning Commission. To date we have not heard from the applicant. The City Council
should direct staff to prepare a resolution for denial for its June 25, 2007, meeting.
Agenda Item #9A: The EFD Board has reviewed reports prepared by technology and imaging
consultants regarding plans and costs to improve them for capital budgeting purposes.
When it acted on the proposed 2007-2028 CIP of the EFD, the Shorewood City Council
indicated that it would review its action regarding capital funding for technology when
such a report was prepared. The consultants' reports indicate that at least $35,000 for
technology improvements by the end of2008 was likely. After reviewing these reports at
its May 30 meeting, the EFD Board believed that approval of the 2007-2028 CIP with
$35,000 for capital budgeting purposes was reasonable, justifiable, and appropriate. The
City Council should determine whether it will reconsider the 2007-2028 CIP with the
$35,000 amount shown for technology improvements and a $170,000 total in capital
transfers.
Agenda Item #9B: Councilmember Callies asked that staff advise the City Council as to what
regulations the City may have relative to noise. The Planning Director has prepared a
memorandum explaining what we currently enforce, including both Code and policy. If the
Council believes an ordinance related to noise or noisy activities is in order, staff should be
directed to research the matter and return with a draft ordinance.
Agenda Item #10A: After a long time to conclude negotiations, Xcel Energy has settled on a
figure of$169,000 as the amount to invoice the City for placing Xcel's facilities
underground for the County Road 19 intersection project. The City had planned to pay for
these costs through a surcharge to all of Xcel' s ratepayers in Shorewood, rather than from
City funds. The proposed surcharge results in an amount of $1. 75/month for 35 months for
residential-class customers. Staff recommends that Council approve the resolution
authorizing the surcharge by Xcel Energy.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, JUNE 11,2007
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
AGENDA
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A. Roll Call
Mayor Lizee _
Woodruff
Turgeon _
Callies
Wellens
B. Review Agenda
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, May 29,2007 (Art.- Minutes)
B. City Council Work Session Minutes, May 29,2007 (Art. - Minutes)
3. CONSENT AGENDA - Motion to approve items on Consent Agenda & Adopt Resolutions
Therein:
NOTE: Give the public an opportunity to request an item be removedfrom the
Consent Agenda. Comments can be taken or questions askedfollowing removalfrom
Consent Agenda.
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List (Art.- Claims List)
B. Staffing - No action required
C. Approve Plans, Specifications and Estimate and Authorize Advertisement of Bids for
Lift Station No. 12 Rehabilitation Project (Art. Engineer's memorandum, Resolution)
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council action will be taken.)
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Mr. Steve Fenlon to Request Public Hearing regarding Tax-Exempt Revenue Note for
Excelsior Covenant Church School (Att. - Administrator's memorandum, Resolution)
B. Report on Minnetonka Community Education (MCE) activities by Tad Shaw, MCE
Representative
C. Report on Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission (LMCC) activities by Patrick
Hodapp, LMCC Representative
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA - June 11,2007
PAGE 2 OF 2
6. PUBLIC HEARING
7. PARKS
8. PLANNING - Report by Representative
A. Conditional Use Permit Amendment (Art. - Planning Director's memorandum)
Applicant: Excelsior Covenant Church
Location: 19955 Excelsior Blvd
B. Zoning Text Amendment Regarding Pool Fences (Art. - Planning Director's memorandum)
Applicant: Blair and Sharon Bury
Location: 28160 Boulder Bridge Drive
9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A. 2007-2028 CIP for Excelsior Fire District (Art. Administrator's memorandum)
B. Noise Regulations (Art. - Planning Director's memorandum)
10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
A. Authorization for surcharge by Xcel Energy for undergrounding electrical facilities as
part of the County Road 19 project (Art. Administrator's memorandum, Resolution)
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator & Staff
B. Mayor & City Council
12. RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
A. 5795 Country Club Road
13. RECONVENE TO REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
14. ADJOURN
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, MAY 29, 2007
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Present.
Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Callies, Turgeon,
Dawson; Associate Artorney Mayeron;
Nielsen; Director of Public Works
oodruff; Administrator
Planning Director
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, APprlJ~l"'Ml~e Agenda as
1 ~ .~; [ ! ~ I I~lt; 111 1 } ,
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES \';1 '\f!ljl!1I1UIl;
. 'i ' · j II 'I' j.
j . :,1 ',WII'll"
II. .'", I.' HIIII W
A. City Council ~~g~~ar Meeting Mif1"~e~, MaY"~d~007
dllllllhllllj!l, 'II! ii'
'I' \" III' 'I I
Callies moved, well~nsi!~;econded,.~pprOving th~l~ity Council Regular Meeting Minutes of May
14,2007, as presentetl~ ijli~jOn passQtl 5/0. Ill. I
'11111, 'I" ','I .'
. III ,I,: p 1:11'
lUI; '11'IIl!lHli ji'
B. ,~.tty,Council WijllU Ses~io~IMjlJ);,t~~~'May 14,2007
"'IUmllwl'II!. 11lilh ' " .phll.'
inf~~ 'f< "d~r~~~d~~. ~11H}:~ f
Wellens;~oved, WOO'(h.>>Wfl;~econ(It!<<i,A,.pproving the City Council Work Session Minutes of May
14, 20!0i?l1~1~~ presented. M"~jJQ1n, passellifl4'Q,;jjl
",IllI.n- lll!..ll....... p'.....f
t:-"{!nl:>-nrLtcHp'
'WIL. '1IIj'. Iii
3. cd~~~~,T AGENDAlllll!l'
lllw'lil'
., ~t.UU:i- . -~i_tf
Mayor Llzee revle~~d)the Item~!0n the Consent Agenda.
'lmn, "'
~Hhlh ,fUr
Wellens moved, Wo~mU<<ffl~econded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda
and Adopting the Res()~Wiions Therein.
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
B. Staffing:
1. Public Works Temporary Seasonal Worker
2. Part-time Liquor Store Clerk (This was moved to Item 9.A under
General/New Business)
1#2A I
SHORE WOOD CITY COUNTIL REGULAR MEETING
May 23, 2007
Page 2 of 7
C. City Clerk's License Approvals
1. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 07-033, "A Resolution Approving a
Temporary 3.2 Percent 'On-Sale' Malt Liquor License Excelsior
Firefighters Relief Association."
2. Licenses to Sell Fireworks Products
D.
Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 07-034, "A Resolution APl?ifoving the Final Plat of R
Bowman Third Addition", and Approving the DeYj,~"p'm,pt Agreement for R
Bowman Third Addition Planned Unit Development_1m"
,l!UnUI\.
,*_Il } -~ \: ~.Ili II.~. -~.
Accept Proposal for Safety Services with Safe ~tfttIre "illlll.,
,L 'j d!hll
Approving ORDINANCE NO. 436, "An~~dl"nn,~~ Enacti~~IQflPIt\dopting the 2007
S-2 Supple~ent to the Code of Ordi~it:*~es for t~e City ,of ShdF~mtll?,d Minn~sota",
and Approvmg RESOLUTION N911~~rl~35, "Tli~, Official SummUmtmfliOrdmance
436" " 'j!l1l1lllh '11U'
. !llllll. ,IWlht lll'
"I!~I!I';dlW' '
Authorize Expenditure of Funds to Cleariljt>>~hSE Area Water Tower (This was
moved to Item 1 O.C under Won~.$)IL
'1;111
tl;i
with a cot
E.
F.
G.
Administrator Dawson stated that Council
I,
,'r}
{l)n to Item 3.D.
Motion passed 5/0.
4. MATTERS
Mayor Lizee stated
Main Improvements
regard to
specific
work
Lane Road Reconstruction and Water
evening's Council work session meeting with
(CIP) proposal. The CIP was a planning tool for
related to the planning of the Project at the
5.
A.
Lake Excelsior Chamber of Commerce 4th of July Committee
Funding for the Lake Minnetonka 4th of July Celebration
Administrator Dawson
Excelsior Chamber of
event.
Dick Osgood, the Chair of the 4th of July Commirtee of the South Lake -
was present this evening to make an annual request for funds for the
Mr. Osgood thanked the City for its support for this event in past years and for including information
about the event in the Shore Report. He stated the event was very patriotic and family oriented. The
day's activities started early in the morning with the firecracker race and ending in the evening with a
fireworks display. Some of the other event activities were a childrens parade, a fishing contest for
children, a concert for very young people, a sand castle building contest, performances by two bands in
the afternoon, and a performance by the Minnesota Orchestra.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNTIL REGULAR MEETING
May 23, 2007
Page 3 of 7
Mr. Osgood stated that he was present this evening to ask the City to contribute funds that would help
offset the costs for the event (e.g., public safety, permits, etc.). He then stated the City had contributed
$2,200 for the event for the last few years, and the City's 2007 budget included $2,200 for the event. He
challenged the City to increase its contribution to $2,500 this year.
Woodruff moved, Wellens seconded, Authorizing $2,200 of Funding to the South Lake - Excelsior
Chamber of Commerce's Lake Minnetonka Fourth of July Celebration Activities.
A.
or activities the
Councilmember Turgeon questioned if Council would like to specify
contribution could be used for. Other Councilmembers did not think that
Motion passed 4/1 with Turgeon dissenting.
6. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
7. PARKS
Arctic Fever Report
'Ullh
Director Brown highlighted the 2008 Arctidlb;~"elh;I?lanning
2007. The 2008 event would be held in conju":.~n~Ulm usinesses
:.J 'j'?
the Excelsior Commons would be involved. AllhArcii
would be held at Freeman Park.. A musher dogll$'ed,tl~
funding for a fifteen-minut~,1 I~~~ri\,vorks display'~~sJbeing sou
;lljWJ dlll"llh 'Illi
8. PLANNING ,d'llll1. 'Iii! III
r!" i'll!llh ill: 1\1. .'
!ttPp> .. J~t;_.. _ qntIi'
Commissioner Gagne repo~e~I~\1iWU~~~t!ly~nfi,~~re9)Hd actions taken at the May 15, 2007, Planning
Commission m~~lIm!llqM"detail~~I~I~he ~;)J)mtij~~NW~A~ meeting).
ill,! lull! !!lIU1d.... I.'. ','.,1. i.,.".,..... ., 11.,.1...'..,...... ',......,...,., q f
rill! '111I1U1h idh,
drrt-r RenewaIUQ~R~ditioijij'llM~f~fre~mit for Storage Building
'lll;!IIIIII'..I' APP~~fl,a.;r. i,t:(jWt SavIOr Lutheran Church
'111111,.,1..,. LocatiR.".:i ~3290 State Highway 7
': %f1fh ,-~iB
't -,'. It.. -.,....,I."._,.:......~..
I' 1)1)
Director Nielsedl d that Ouh~avior Lutheran Church was located at 23290 State Highway 7. In late
2000 t?e .Churchl~anted.fll~ond~tional use permit (cy.P.) to construct a~ addition on the east end of
the bUIldmg to be usealqiIP,~@,inmul1lty room and gymnasIUm. The plans also mcluded a proposed storage
building (garage) to bql!lbcated at the northeast corner of the easterly parking lot. Although the
community room additi16n was built following approval of the C.U.P., the storage building was not.
Because conditional use permits expired if they were not used within one year, the Church had reapplied
for a C.U.P. to build the structure. He noted the proposed structure measured 32 feet x 36 feet, which was
somewhat larger than the original plan which was 24 feet x 32 feet. He explained that although the larger
structure would result in the loss of one parking space, the Church had nine more spaces than what was
required by the Zoning Code. He stated the proposed structure complied with City's zoning regulations.
been held on May 15,
It was anticipated that
would occur in Shorewood
the activities planned. Sponsor
Nielsen stated that the Planning Commission had unanimously recommended approval of the C.U.P.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNTlL REGULAR MEETING
May 23, 2007
Page 4 of7
Commissioner Gagne commented that the increase in the structure size was necessary to accommodate a
larger bus, which had been donated, than the Church had in 2000.
In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, Director Nielsen stated the proposed structure
complied with the 15-foot height restriction. In response to another question, Nielsen explained that he
had done sound testing with regard to the Church's HV AC and the sound decibels were within PCA
regulations. He commented that the HV AC did have an annoying pitch; but, neither the City's Code nor
the PCA regulations addressed that issue. He stated there would be no change to the existing lighting, and
that lighting was in compliance. ill',
1,!I,II!llu>,
", '"
Wellens moved, Callies seconded, Approving RESOLUTION NO. oiAl036, "A Resolution Granting
a Conditional Use Permit for the Construction of an Accesl~~ptllml,J1IRding at the Our Savior
Lutheran Church." Motion passed 5/0. dl' ' I!llh,
{{tit {t1tiHh,.
1111,'10
9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS lllll;,
"11111111 ,', ,
A. Part-time Liquor Store Clerk '111\11111'11
II'
This item was removed from the consent agenda at I
Callies moved, Wellens
was needed to perform duties
ten hours per week,
position which was
Administrator Dawson explained the reqm~~h!r r a part-time
previously performed by one part-time liquotUl who had
'l:t
and some of the duties performed by the full-ti
eliminated.
Councilmember Wood'
il"
ensure it reflected the cos
Liquor Operations budget be reviewed to
not receive any benefits nor would it be eligible
10.
A.
Award Contract for Radio Read Meters
Administrator Dawson
tabulated on May 23,
the bids for the Water Meter Replacement Project were opened and
Director Brown stated the City had received two bids. The low bid was placed by Northern Water Works
Supply for an amount of $255,295.38; that company was considered a leader in the supply and
installation of radio read water meters. This project was estimated at $210,000 within the $1,525,000
bond issue in 2005. Based on the recommendation from two councilmembers, Staff reviewed the bid and
determined if the two-inch and three-inch diameter meters were omirted from the project, the revised
amount for the project would be $223,331.21 (or a savings of $31 ,964.17).
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNTIL REGULAR MEETING
May 23, 2007
Page 5 of7
Brown then stated there were bond proceeds available from the bonds issued for the building
rehabilitation phase of the Amesbury Well project to cover the $13,331.21 difference between the
original bonding amount and the modified bid. He explained that when that cost for that phase of the
project was estimated, the estimate included funds to do more rehabilitation work than was ultimately
needed.
Brown went on to recommend awarding the contract as it was bid out, and Staff would then present
Council with a change order that would eliminate the replacement of the 2-inch and 3-inch diameter
meters. He noted that the larger diameter meters would eventually need to be ,~r,placed.
I,Ulllh,
Councilmember Callies stated the reasons for doing the project inclu~Aijl~~fety'l~nd efficiency gains. If
th~ larger-diameter meters w.ere not re~laced then there would still i~~I~~~lll,~oncerns and inefficiencies
wIth regard to manually readmg those sIxteen meters. '1ll!1'lllIlh,
!Ill" 'Ill, "'Iln,
Director Brown reviewed the reasons the meters needed.h~IH::l&'typraced. Therel
would be achieved through the use of electronic metrnli'eading technology. Th
artacks would be reduced. The new meters would beIDRt~i~ccurate; meters aged th
and as a result the City lost revenues from incorrect rrieaSUtmB!~apa~' 'il~'
'IHll!,dl "
{1: ~] r l J:.~t J J
In response to a question from Councilmember Callies, Direct~<<mrgwn explained larger diameter meters
were needed to handle significant water for commercl~~if~tounts or for areas that had a large
number of irrigation heads). He stated it possible to'!t~~\1\~e ~!1 existing 2-inch diameter
meter with a I-inch diameter meter. illlllll,l
Jiv
f
re efficiencies that
ilities from dog
~,l~.Q,I~'eteriorated
'1111P
II
H
n
Councilmember Wellens commented that if the
be any issues related to dQgl
replacing the meters, AIVlr
Councilm~m?er Wel~~rlti~l~~,ed that
order to ehmmate them tr~llill",i.,l"..r""'i,.,e..""",p..
''''1.1,
"Inl'
Councilmern,b~flmt"tiftl"(f statJUI
applauded,,~11'Pfinalwgl~IMiSlY to
dlJjf t.~.'Z'~'1\b.l
project.,f' . e commented tW~tl~b.,ere w
hl:J:;l 7tt[Jttt
neeq;tBltfe:lll,yplaced. '1111111
ffil ~ ;l; ~ \ 1p' [j
Director B~~lJJ,HlWfted that thelUHange order to eliminate the larger diameter meters would also include
another small d~~<<t~\?n. ,ill
ttIIU~~., .[..~.~.~.
Wellens moved, wUqP~~f~jI~econded, Approving RESOLUTION NO. 07-037, "A Resolution
Accepting Bid and Aw~t"ing Contract for Water Meter Replacement Project, City Project No. 07-
04." Motion passed 5/0:'
sites, there would not
that was not the only reason for
larger would have to be replaced.
could be discussed further when the change
the replacement of all the City's meters; and he
was higher than the amount of bond proceeds for the
meters in addition to the sixteen meters that would also
B. Change Order for Badger Field Lighting Project
Engineer Landini stated that Council awarded the contract for the Badger Field Lighting Project to
Honda Electric at its April 23, 2007, meeting. The bid was awarded before the results of the soil boring
logs were analyzed, to keep the project on schedule. The results of soil borings that were obtained
confirmed that there was approximately 9 - 10 feet of clay-fill materials overlaying approximately 12-
24 feet of organic solids. The initial recommendation from the soil engineer was to install piling for the
SHOREWOOD CITY CO UNTIL REGULAR MEETING
May 23, 2007
Page 6 of7
four light standards that had been proposed. An alternative of spread footings had then been proposed.
The cost for the 6.4-foot spread footings for each pole would increase the project cost by $4,320.85,
Wellens moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving RESOLUTION NO. 07-038, "A Resolution
Approving a Change Order 1 for the Badger Field Lighting Project, City Project No. 06-07."
Motion passed 5/0.
C. Authorize Expenditure of Funds to Clean the SE Area Water Tower
dk
This item was removed from the consent agenda at Councilmember Woodr,l!1~f!~lF~quest.
til!' "
Councilmember Woodruff suggested that the authorization of fun~41IPJ~ihhe cleaning of the SE Area
_; ::~,: ' . ,: ;: ~.'" i= ;~
Water Tower be postponed until there had been discussion with re(~~r'd to tfiiji~Q07 - 2011 CIP. He stated
that i~, 2~06 the Council ha~ delayed th~ rehabil~tati?n""o,Jlif~el,I([ower ll~~~~h,r,O,.,O,8 or 2009. If the
rehabIlItatIOn was to be done m 2008, he dId not thmk It,>>1ais'a:Qgood use of fun"~;.,to spend $4,000 to
clean the Tower this .year. If the rehabilitation was d~ln~gd until ?009 he wouldlij~flfl?rt doing minor
work on the Tower thIS year. , .ilIUli,i,:,.""" ll.""" , 'flH 1',1"'111
1"'111111, 11', '11'11
;ll'H" ""hll'!" 11
'i :"" /t"[h>~J
Councilmember Callies stated she had also wondered when\~ lh~6ilit~ition project wdbld be done, She
stated the Tower did not look very nice, and it was a marter 0 ~'H,pride to improve its looks. From her
vantage point, the Tower served as a gatewa~,lJinto the communit;l!lft"~,stated residents of other cities had
f'-t:!. 'i ~. " : %t {1'::i;\;
related to her that they thought the Tower loo~r~nlm?:'. '1!lm!;. ,il
Hj,hlWHh '1IIII'I"I:!!'
'"'HIIII1''' ,Iii' I
, . II, :IQ,lll.il, Ill" .
In response to a questIOn from Councllmember !~,allIes,~~~~~tw Browflllstated that If the Tower were to
be cleaned in 2007 it would result in a slight redJijtioqli~lth~I&~~ifl~PI(i)'% of the $4,000 cost for cleaning)
for the rehabilitation 0 an initial cle~nitig; the To~~P'would still have to be power washed
before it could be stated that tff~ITower looked "tough". In 2006 he had received
approximately fifteen ~o the Tower'~lkppearance.
t, 'lh~:X:lfJ
" " WI'
~IWl~~'i~Hm~~~e'Authorization of the Expenditure of Funds to
a JiiiyhJH~,<<~tVtity Council meeting.
Woodruff moved,
Clean the SI;I~ll~liWftter
j' IIIP !lllt'!!I'I',",',lL
tiP" - ''' ---~1....itJt}tl
Co~ncp~~inber Callies II~t~t~f1I~~e
proJeo'tlsp.nuld be approved tH?t'tlUlght.
1,1'", pi I'
"I,H t [
I!II!! '; II;
Mayor LizeJIs~4frqthe cleaninaipf the Tower had been discussed for a few years, and it continued to get
delayed. She thOllr~nMhe cleanirtrlshould be approved that night.
Ip hl,'l ' dl
~tE'i__,_:. "f":
I 'ihh, ,p,i!/' C '1 b W d ff. D' B d 'f C 'I h' d
n response to a quest.ttll,,','..,'II,tij(j)1'n ounCI mem er 00 ru, lrector rown state I ouncl aut onze
the funds six weeks fro~~~w the cleaning could still be accomplished in 2007.
,I/'
to continue this to a future meeting; she thought the
Councilmember Turgeon stated she did not think it was appropriate to authorize funds for cleaning the
Tower in 2007, if the Tower were to be rehabilitated in 2008,
Motion passed 4/1 with Lizee dissenting.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNTIL REGULAR MEETING
May 23, 2007
Page 7 of7
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator & Staff
1. Report on Spring Clean-up
Director Brown stated that approximately one-third the number of the appliances collected during
previous spring clean-up days were collected this year. The amount of electronic refuse had increased
substantially over previous years. He then stated that he would provide with the statistical
information about this year's spring clean-up day at a future meeting.
B. Mayor & City Council
(LMCC) full
its Joint Powers
had grown, but
for
Councilmember Woodruff reported on a Lake Minnetonka
committee meeting he had attended. He stated the LMCC
Agreement and would also conduct a review of its
what constituted a quorum remained the same.
budgeting. The LMCC's Executive Committee's
Councilmember Turgeon suggested Council schedule
performance review for sometime in July. Sh~.stated she would
that would be used for discussion. There Was~?nsensus to
discussion and the informal review for July 23,g007.
Mayor Lizee stated she attended a State of the~aters>Surfinw~~pn>May 24, 2007. The meeting was
attended by various offici~ls ftity administratopsfrom the fourteen Lake Minnetonka area cities;
officials form the Minnesota 1JiSe, and Senate; > . and representatives from the Lake Minnetonka
Conservation Districtdmi~ Three l~ty>ers Park Dist~ict, the Lake Minnetonka Association and the
Minnehaha Creek W8.tersl1e>d'District
AdministratorP)a~~on ~tated there was an EFD work session scheduled for May 30, 2007, to discuss a
very preli1Uiti~ry 2008 EtD Operating Budget.
~. f"
12. ADJOURN
"'IItII
lItT\t, .:i'
Wellens m~tJ~>>.~h~Toodruff s~~~hded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of May
29,2007, at 7:50>!lliM. Motionlpassed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SWtBMIJftED,
Christine Freeman, Re~~rder
Christine Lizee, Mayor
ATTEST:
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
TUESDA Y, MAY 29, 2007
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:30 P.M. or Immediately Following
Regular City Council Meeting
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 8:00 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present.
Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Callies,
Dawson; Associate Attorney Mayeron;
Nielsen; Director of Public Works
Administrator
Director
Absent:
None
B.
Review Agenda
Wellens moved, Woodruff seconded,
passed 5/0.
2. 5795 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
Administrator Dawson
with Home Leasing &
house located at 57931,,'
restrictive terms to th'e fi
had authorized an agreement
services for the City-owned
there had been discussion regarding adding
for addition to the firm's leased based on
f60uld provide a 90-day notice of early termination after six
assed, and that the lessee would be given credit for the last
standard for a lease was one year.
~
~ prepayment of the first month's rent and a security deposit equal to
tll t. The property manager did not recommend requiring the last month's
, m up-front as it would limit marketability.
~ Carpet .,~, aning at the end of the lease - the lessee would be responsible to pay for
professional carpet cleaning.
~ Water softener - the lessee would be responsible for operating the softener during
tenancy.
~ Pets - the property owner preferred to market the property with the option that one small
pet would be allowed, and he/she would not permit a pet if the potential lessee did not
appear to be responsible. A larger security deposit would be required if there was to be a
pet.
I #2B I
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING
May 29, 2007
Page 2 of7
Administrator Dawson stated the more terms there were in a lease the fewer potential lessees there would
be.
After discussion, there was Council consensus to modify Home Leasing & Management's standard lease
to include the above terms.
Administrator Dawson clarified that the property manager must have a legitimate reason to request to
enter the house, and the manager had a list of items he/she would want to check on that would allow
him/her to enter the house every few months.
Administrator Dawson stated this item wouil;4"be addressed at a
, 11 ilK .~. & ~. s
Attorney Mayeron excused himself form the ~~~il>>~lft~\~1:,10 P.M.
\11 "qthUli.H
i[; "jl"I!!",
3. DRAFT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTj~IROGMW1UInIIl1l b,dl
dIPi,,! '11Lci1W'llllllllW
Administrator Dawson st~~~I1@o<<<<, had receivedl~;"very first",lcrfaft of the City's 2007 - 2011 Capital
Improvement Program,~~~P) for di sion purpose~l,The accompanying cover memo he had prepared
provided an overvie'NiijQWnRital im, ~men~ budg~d: CIP was a. snapshot of needs, a sched~l~ of
improvements, and a schel:lU fiQyll1g; it was mt ed to be reviewed and changed as conditions
and priorities cha~~~.',He co ~'hlih,~mj:lt,~l~, possible to level out future capital expenditure
spending, ~i~'l>>Im:q.hl~~~I~:ent ,11,draft"et~l.!IUlil;ex~laine? that Staff had .attempted to optimize t~e
schedule~~;usmg tliedttfnf~\ructu ~m. rovement Matnx wlllch rated the vanous roadways; the Matnx
helpedii~i~etermining wH1~)plifl~oject~I~li?e combined to optimize benefits. The availability of funds
for s~0Y~litftf~r managemen'fl~Wl1l>roveme rojects would be the driving factor in determining what street
reconstruc~t4i'4\hprojects could B~IRerfor
~tl:UI-r-h~'fUH
Dawson noted'iitUtll~pcal Roadl#~y Fund and the Storm Water Fund lacked the funds to perform key
infrastructure mairlt~~~ll~e pr?J!~tts.
lJU~I;U'-I." ,tt,~.~Jf
'It I Jil"
Dawson stated a key ass~1hption in the preparation of the CIP was the level of transfers that had been
made in the last few year~" would continue to be done in the next few years.
Praise Church had
be pursued to recover
related that it was
Praise Church and
be recovered in
Associate Attorney Mayeron stated Attorney Keane had related
merged into Livingwaters Church; therefore there was an existing
some of the City's loses. If the City chose to pursue recovery
Keane's recommendation to file suit in conciliation court
Livingwaters Church as the defendants. The maximum
conciliation court would be $15,000. The cost to go to
Mayor Lizee questioned if this topic could be
11,2007.
on June
Dawson stated the City currently transferred $345,000 from the General Fund annually to the Local
Roadway Fund; of that $160,000 was allocated per year for roadway seal coating and overlay
improvements. If that level of funding were to continue, it would take a few decades just to reconstruct
all of the roadways rated "3" in the pavement management assessment done in 2007. The proposed
Amlee Road / Glen Road / Manitou Lane Road Reconstruction and Water Main Improvements Project
would consume a significant portion of the Local Roadway Fund. The ability to accelerate roadway
reconstruction would require significantly higher revenues than the City was currently receiving.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING
May 29, 2007
Page 3 of7
The following possibilities for significantly increasing funding for roadway reconstruction were
reviewed.
The City could issue bonds for roadway reconstruction without a referendum; the
issuance of bonds would be limited to projects listed in the CIP, and a petition signed by
a minimum of 5% ofthe registered voters could force the matter to referendum.
The City could levy assessments against the adjoining properties to reflect the benefit the
properties would receive.
State Statutes do not give cities the authority to establish a s,W~et utility, although efforts
had been made in the last several legislative sessions to g~n~1itHa~\~uthority.
tlf'
Dawson stated that a revision related to the technology/office equ;\~~I!~~li und portion of the CIP had
been provided to reflect the financial software package whicl~!~~d i~~; ently been omitted. In
previous years that fund had been labeled as public facilities(;9ffiIJ~ equipI this draft the public
facilities fund was moved back to the General Fund atiitHi~htin\e, and tn facilities/office
,e :~} - .. I ,
equipment fund was relabeled to technology/office equipm.~flt.
dk
HilL !
Dawson clarified that the purpose this evening waSI1~\~Rtnl,}OWar~,JI~~;eement on the
and ti.metable for the. next five years. The CIP depicted wll."mhe,~f~fnh9ught were
and hIghest value projects for the next five years.'\illllli,
* I 1:1' _; 1 % ~.I.I: IlJ_~
Director Brown stated it had been past prac~\~fflfR}und various pitli~I~~.,~ major road reconstruction out
of the appropriate fund (i.e., water main insta'1i't~l~1t~I~m;~ water impPd>~~mf;.t1:ts, roadway improvements,
and sanitary sewer improvements would all beclfUlldeQi~ut!,9f a differe~~;;fund). The cost for roadway
t t " _ - " " :i ? ~, i j ; :(, :; 0<. .; I -,
reconstruction had increased substantially over t~F lastJeWIM~~m,.w~.ich resulted in funds in the Local
Roadway Fund being consu~F\~H t a higher ratel~~ollWad b~~HI,*,~H~ed. Previous major storm water
improvement projects (e'~HltlhHlii ~ory storm w~~Fr plan upda,te, and the Mary Lake project) resulted
in the Storm Water FU~l~I~~ing SigI irntly under fu'blY,ed.
\\''11;11111; II 111\,.\\
Brown explained there wa~I~lhli ,~;\~tg~Y that couldltpplace the current overlay method that he would
like to see the City test, altPl~ltHg!~11~1\W;9h\~~r;(i,',it deal of history with regard to the use of that
technology. J;~~I>>"!lI!l~~brolo ' app;CHHmM~~JW'one-half of the cost of the current overlay method.
The City"IPI-rvt:inn.et()~ljij~IIffR~bcurr. !~ing the new tech.nology .for one-~nch ove~lays, and the City of
Plymo; Was trymg It onl~~~F of It 1~~?:F;,sacs. An engmeer WIth the CIty of Mmnetonka related that
he th&\ e new technoloMM~''Puld ha~~;~1ife span of approximately eight years. There were currently
three cont ,s that had beenltf:qined alia certified to use the new technology. He suggested the City do
a pilot with ,I ew technoloMjUon Yellowstone Trail between Country Club Road and Lake Linden
Drive; that roa iWas high t.Mffic and it still had some structural integrity. He would also like to test
the technology on~~tt;-traf~~lfoad. He commented that once a roadway had deteriorated to the degree
that it had heaved or 15~~~l~,qIj,;lthe new technology would not work. The City's roadways rated higher than
3 could be candidates fd~IU~fing the new technology on. He stated if he could work out the details with the
contractor, he would bring the request for conducting a pilot project using the new technology to Council
at its next meeting.
~
~
~
priorities
priority
There was ensuing discussion regarding the CIP.
There was Council consensus to leave the following in the CIP as presented or to make the identified
changes to it.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING
May 29, 2007
Page 4 of7
~ No further transfers would be made to the Land & Open Space Acquisition Fund, and its
existing funds would be transferred to the Storm Water Management Fund. If funds were
needed for land acquisitions it would be funded out of the General Fund.
~ The Municipal Water System projects would remain a presented.
~ The Parks projects would remain as presented.
~ The Public Facilities fund would be expanded to include one-half of the cost to refurbish
City Hall in 2008 and the second half in 2009, based on the most recent cost of $2
million to do that project. There would also be a transfer in from the
Technology/Equipment Fund (see below).
~ The Sanitary Sewer projects would remain as presented.
~ The current Technology/Office Equipment Fund ould reduced to $100,000,
and the remainder would be transferred to the s Fund. There would not be
a $50,000 transfer into the Technology/Office 2008.
~ The Equipment Replacement Fund should be the peaks and valleys
in funding, understanding that delaying replacement
could result in the need to purchase a in a particular
year.
~
The following clarifications were made.
~
~
The Land and Open Spacel~cquisition fund
cost to ~rocess land that 1*II~fi?I~~rty owner
conservatIOn easements.!I;!J1;;1ll
The list of roadway overlay pr6~J~ctsj[~!ij~
The scheduling of some of th~lwoje~f~I~~J
accumulate,d, ',!~lfl9JJ,!Rh funds to p~y ~~{,fpe cost 0
There was,"~!M:!:!ir! ded project ~~~eduled 1.
The li~j~Wtion reH . ation projectsl{or the lifts on Enchanted Island and Shady Island
were!seH~ftl'll~d in 0 l' to level out s#'n~!pg.
The $50,0(1X~IJRrr yj 1~IJ!vltration & II1i'qldw (1&1) reduction project was to conduct the
investigation an" I\?ilf' 1'~~~mmll1itX ;!~;J&I.
H'I~houldii"4)'nt,ify wH.atQJIHJ~rojects would be done in 2008 so that information
cou 1~+I,I>> d in !1~irJP!~ring the 2008 budgets. The General Fund budget would be
prepared 'l~ summ-er~J~n~11t included transfers into some of the funds for the projects
being consij in the ~f~PThe Enterprise Funds budgets would be prepared in October
Novembe ,.
Parks ca projects identified for 2008 were projects the Park Commission
highest priority. Parks projects identified further out in the five-year
given as in-depth consideration. The Commission had been quite
projects that would consume the $320,000 in the Park Fund. Park
had also been used to fund Parks projects in the past; but park dedication
fees
For roadway projects which also included a water project component, the water project
costs were funded from assessments.
The $53,000 shown in Public Facilities in 2007 was for window replacements and
HV AC changes. The $140,000 in 2008 was for drainage and siding.
The funds for the Public Works addition project for a cost of $400,000 were budgeted as
follows: $60,000 was budgeted in 2006 for an architectural study (which was not done);
$170,000 was budgeted in 2007; and it was assumed the remaining $170,000 would be
budgeted in 2008. The 2006 and 2007 funds were accumulating in the General Fund. The
~
~
in the near future.
was related to having
~
~
~
~
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING
May 29, 2007
Page 5 of7
~
CIP reflects the full cost of $400,000 in 2008 as that is the year the project was expected
to be completed.
The quality of truck maintenance had extended the dump-truck life-cycle from ten years
to 15 - 20 years.
In 2003, a capital assessment policy was adopted, and that policy addressed the expected
life-cycle of equipment, but not other assets (e.g. water towers). Depreciation sheets
were maintained for equipment. Bonds had previously been used to fund water towers or
other utilities. The decision regarding the funding of very costly items such as that was
whether to depreciate the item and save money for its rep!~acement or to finance the
I h h h . fb d d .... ,(!HI'1
rep acement t roug t e Issuance 0 on s an pay lor It 9)~\fjtfl'm,e.
There had been previous consensus by Council to not a'~s for r~adway improvements.
There had been previous discussion by Council assessing for storm water
management improvements, but no decision discussion would be
continued in a future meeting.
~
~
~
~
The following suggestions were made to enhance the
Additional noteworthy comments were as fJilgU1~h,
1 t' I-:t 1.1 ~_! H t f II
f ~.-';' i j:~: f $1 Ii 1
There w.as.a suggestion that a.r~fEr, ~~ll ," ould be for each fund.
A des~n~tlon should ~e p~ovIde~lfor t,~ll Works exp~nsion project, and
the pnonty Oft'l t project II1 relatIqj1~I\~1JP 0 0 should be dIscussed.
A ~ombin~~I~~Hjf!lo do all of tH":foadway. .water m.anagement projects and
estImat~~lcosts ~lt4, be prepared'lt:or CounCIl to reVIew so It can understand what
finall~il~ltnf9~rces ~~pld be requiredll~\~)1mplete them, and to ensure the priorities are
correct. ltIIIH>.,!!;;; '.llpl
~!~~"~eshouldl"WI~I~lt"h~I~~1t~~~\~Wn~t~tfocusing on roadway improvement projects.
~ ,.I!nmJNI~ii~r't>' proJ~~lfpl, not just'f~ll~-W!y improvement projects, must be considered when
dlllll" determi,I 1'}YhiclHij iority projects. would be funded.. .
,'IIRK The Am ll~~d ! "R~d / Ma?Itou Lane Road ReconstructIOn. and Water Mam
il!!lIIIWII) ImprovemeI t~im~~Ject c ,.' ldlbe done II1 2008 based on current assumptIons for the Local
1lllllih,Roadway FunqHI,ut it V{< uld significantly impact what roadway reconstruction projects
l!11.I~R!lld be done i\1l~tlture years.
'lJ1'IKffirnology in~~ntory wa~ available; that inventory would be provided to Coun~il: A
reqlil'~~IWaS In~<Ie for a prOjected technology replacement or purchase schedule, sImIlar
to th'Jl~"ft\~,~nt replacement projections.
JII!I)
4.
something
~
Re-order the projects by
meaningful.
Re-order the sources and uses of funds list
~
~
~
~
OTHER
f';'
A Glen Road property owner questioned if the property owners along Glen Road would have any say in
the Amlee Road, Glen Road, and Manitou Lane road reconstruction and water main improvements
project for which a feasibility study had been done. She stated that it sounded the City had already
decided to do the project as described in the feasibility report. Council clarified that was not the case.
Wally Piroyan, 24845 Glen Road, stated he spoke with Engineer Landini the previous week regarding the
feasibility study, and Landini had been very helpful. He then stated his concerns about the feasibility
report and the potential project with regard to Glen Road. The draft feasibility report for that project did
CITY OF SHORE WOOD WORK SESSION MEETING
May 29, 2007
Page 6 of7
not address the impact on the environment, and the report's mention of a few trees was very arbitrary. A
survey had not been done as part of the feasibility study to provide information regarding where the new
street would be located; therefore, it would not be appropriate to draw any conclusion from the report.
The report did not address utilities, or the impact of moving the telephone poles would have on the
mature trees. The feasibility report did not address the decrease in property values that would result from
the loss of mature trees; an arborist should be hired to evaluate the short-term and long-term impact from
the loss of trees. He suggested residents should be provided with drawings depicting what Glen Road
would look like after the project had been completed. He noted that Kate Netwal had previously
submitted a petition signed by seven property owners at the west end of Road and a resident on
Harding Lane requesting that Glen Road west of Manitou Lane not be He stated that in the
eleven years he had been a property owner on Glen Road he had any of the property owners
request that Glen Road be widened or that City water be installed.
Director Brown explained that the first step in
feasibility study to determine the scope of the
roadway be constructed, and could the project be funded
did not address the level of detail requested by Mr. Piroyan;
given to move forward with the design ofth,<i\f?roject.
llll
l},
Director Brown then explained if Council app'
step would be for Council to review the desl
comment on the project. The impact on the
would be reviewed.
the project, then the next
then be held to take public
and possible assessments
Engineer Landini stated Mr. Piroyan's concerns would
feasibility study was to determine the viability of the
There was public
had been done.
be difficult to stop the project once the design
property owners and informational meetings
phase.
Kate N
stated'
impacting
reducing the
there was a cost to the City for the feasibility study. She
on Glen Road did need to have the drainage issues
if it would be possible to evaluate the possibility of
Road without doing a new feasibility study.
Councilmember
this project.
that the purpose of the work session was not to discuss the details of
Mayor Lizee neighborhood meeting be scheduled to listen to the residents' concerns.
She stated the feasibility report did not address details that had been mentioned. Nothing had been
decided with regard to advancing the project.
Mr. Piroyan expressed concern that he thought the project had moved to this level "under the radar".
Mayor Lizee stated that nothing had been done "under the radar" and nothing had been decided with
regard to the project. She again stated another neighborhood meeting could be scheduled and an
information packet could be provided to the Glen Road property owners. She then stated property
owners would be notified of the neighborhood meeting schedule well in advance of the meeting.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING
May 29, 2007
Page 7 of7
5. ADJOURN
Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of May
29,2007, at 9:46 P.M. Motion passed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk
ATTEST:
PAYABLESAPPROVALS
For 06/11/2007 Council Meeting
Prepared b~? '/ / ,_' Date:
Michelle T. Nguy n, ~r. Accounting Clerk
Reviewed by: ~tL ~ Date: t96/!!7ft7
Bonnie/Burton Fi
1;/
Approved by:
Crai
Date: !},!Jl!J7
A
PAYROLL APPROVALS
For 06/11/2007 Council Meeting
Prepared by: ,. Date: ;} J'" kJ
Reviewed by: L. {/o,( Date: (!JGlo1/07
Bonnie Burton, . ance Director
Approved by: Date: tJt lJ7 01
Crai awson, City Administrator
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us. cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years · 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Craig Dawson, City Administrator
FROM:
J ames Landini, City Engineer
DATE:
June 07, 2007
RE:
Approve Plans, Specifications and Estimate and Authorize Advertisement of Bids
Lift Station 12 Rehabilitation Project
Attachment 1 is excerpts of the plans, specifications, and engineers estimate for the Lift Station 12
Rehabilitation Project.
Estimated costs for the construction are shown in Attachment 1.
If approved, the bid opening will be conducted on July 18, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. at City Hall.
Recommendation
Staff is recommending approval of resolution that approves the plans, specifications, and engineer's
estimate and authorizes advertisement of bids (see Attachment 2.) A resolution is included for your
consideration.
,~
Ii' t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
.....
June 11, 2007
Rehabilitation of Lift Station No. 12
City ProjectNo. 06-01
WSB Project No. 1608-05
I Attachment # 1
701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416 (763) 541-4800
Prepared for:
CITY OF
SlIORE\VOOD
Prepared by:
...
WSB
& Associates, Inc.
PROJECT MANUAL
REHABILITATION OF LIFT STATION NO. 12
CITY PROJECT NO. 06-01
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
June 11, 2007
Prepared by:
WSB & Associates, Inc.
701 Xenia Ave South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
(763) 541-4800
(763) 541-1700 (Fax)
REHABILITATION OF LIFT STATION NO.12
CITY PROJECT NO. 06-01
CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MN
WSB PROJECT NO. 1608-05
WSB
Engineer's Estimate
Project Number: 01608 -05
Project Title or Name: Reconstruction of LS No. 12
Work Type: Final Design
Item No. Description I Units I Base Bid I Alternate I Quantity Unit Price Total Price
Schedule A - Chritmas Lake Point Lift Station (12)
2100.601 LIFT STATION REHABILITATION LUMP SUM Base Bid 1,00 $67,000.00 $67,000.00
2101.511 CLEARING AND GRUBBING LUMP SUM Base Bid 1.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00
2104.505 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SQYD Base Bid 38.00 $10.00 $380.00
2211.501 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 MOD TON Base Bid 35.00 $33.00 $1,155.00
2350.501 TYPE LV 4 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (B) TON Base Bid 5.00 $150.00 $750.00
2350.502 TYPE LV 3 NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (B) TON Base Bid 5.00 $135.00 $675.00
2357,502 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GALLON Base Bid 3.00 $5.00 $15.00
2573.502 SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED L1N FT Base Bid 113.00 $8.00 $904.00
2575.605 SEEDING, MIX 240 (INCL. TOPSOIL & FERTILIZER) ACRE Base Bid 0.50 $4,400.00 $2,200.00
2573.502 SILT FENCE, TYPE SELF -SUPPORTING TREE PROTECTION L1N FT Base Bid 101.00 $10.00 $1,010.00
Total Schedule A - Chritmas Lake Point Lift Station (12) $75,589.00
Total $75,589.00
Certified By:
Registration No.
Date:
http://wsb4/RtAEC/materials.asp?WorkOrderId=3196& W orkOrderNum=01608%2D05&Pr... 61712007
PLAN SYMBOLS
STATE UNE
COUN1Y UNE
TOWNSHIP OR RANGE LINE
SECTION LINE
QUARTER LINE
SIXTEENTH LINE
RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE
SLOPE EASEMENT
PRESENT RIGHT-OF-WAY
CONTROL OF ACCES UNE
PROPER1Y UNES (EXCEPT LAND UNES)
VACATED PLATTED PROPER1Y
CORPORATE OR CI1Y UMITS
TRUNK HIGHWAY CENTER LINE
RETAINING WALL
RAILROAD
RAILROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY
RIVER OR CREEK
DRY RUN
DRAINAGE DITCH
DRAIN TILE
CULVERT
DROP INLET
GUARD RAIL
BARBED WIRE FENCE
WOVEN WIRE FENCE
CHAIN UNK FENCE
RAILROAD SNOW FENCE
STONE WALL OR FENCE
HEDGE
RAILROAD CROSSING SIGN
RAILROAD CROSSING BELL
ELECTRIC WARNING SIGN
CROSSING GATE
MEANDER CORNER
SPRINGS
MARSH
~~~~:RD }
BRUSH
NURSERY
CATCH BASIN
FIRE HYDRANT
CATTLE GUARD
OVERPASS (HIGHWAY OVER)
UNDERPASS (HIGHWAY UNDER)
BRIDGE
BUILDING (ONE STORY FRAME)
F - FRAME C - CONCRETE
S - STONE T - TILE
B - BRICK ST - STUCCO
IRON ROO OR PIPE
MONUMENT (STONE. CONCRETE. OR METAL)
WOODEN HUB
GRAVEL PIT
SAND PIT
BORROW PIT
ROCK QUARRY
~L--
\llill. \llill. "
~
--y-y-y-y
"'" NAME ='>
SIZE
-->----------
0====='
-x-x-
~X ---.::Lx_
.-fb..x --9:.. x-
lm\?!mll\?!mJ
~
'-..J~,--,......
'l'
~
IJ
.
0- --0
$.$tt
s
. CB
.,. 0
- H-t-
~$=
~
11-S-FI~
75
o MDNU.
.
@
@
@
@
UTILITY
SYMBOLS
-9--------+
POWER POLE LINE
TELEPHONE OR TELEGRAPH POLE LINE
JOINT TELEPHONE AND POWER
ON POWER POLE
ON TELEPHONE POLES
ANCHOR
STREET LIGHT
PEDESTAL (TELEPHONE CABLE TERMINAL)
GAS MAIN
WATER MAIN
CONDUIT
TELEPHONE CABLE IN CONDUIT
ELECTRIC CABLE IN CONDUIT
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
BURIED TELEPHONE CABLE
BURIED ELECTRIC CABLE
AERIAL TELEPHONE CABLE
SEWER (SANITARY OR STORM)
SEWER MANHOLE
SCALES
INDEX MAP
f"6....j:jF.3
PLAN
1i31E1E3l='~
PROFILE
HORIZ. f'",",,"
o
VERT. r..v
o
.@----@-
@ @
f--
"
11!IPED.
-G-
'V"'== T=
'V"'== P=
rn
D'J
-T-BUR~
-P-BUR-
..........T~AE .........-
->~>
-> ------0--->
1000 2000
30 60
30
60
REHABILITATION
OF
LIFT
STATION
NO.
12
FOR THE
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR
REHABILITATION OF LIFT STATION NO. 12
LOCATED ON
CHRISTMAS LAKE ROAD
CITY PROJECT NO. 06-01
y~
THE INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS CONCERNING
TYPE AND LOCATION OF PRIVATE UTILITIES IS NOT GUARANTEED
TO BE ACCURATE OR ALL-INCLUSIVE. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO
DETERMINE THE TYPE AND LOCATION OF PRIVATE UTILITIES AS
MAY BE NECESSARY TO AVOID DAMAGE THERETO.
EXCAVATION NOTICE SYSTEM
A CALL TO GOPHER STATE ONE (651-454-0002)
IS REQUIRED A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS PRIOR TO
PERFORMING ANY EXCAVATION.
5 N. 40266616
10
01608-05
GOVERNING SPECIFICATIONS
THE 2000 EDITION OF THE MINNESOTA OEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
"STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION."
ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND SIGNING SHALL COM FORM TO THE MN MUTCD
INCLUDING THE FIELD MANUAL FOR TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL ZONE LAYOUTS.
DATED JANUARY. 2004. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL HAVE RETROREFLECTIVE
SHEETING.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARD DETAIL PLATES
FOR STREET & UTILITY CONSTRUCTION - 2001 EDITION
WATERMAIN AND SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA
STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFICATIONS.
SHEET INDEX
GENERAL (GEN)
G-01 TITLE SHEET, LOCATION MAP, TOC
SITE WORK (SW)
C-01 LIFT STATION NO. 12 EXISTING CONDITIONS & SITE PLAN
I
+
LIFT STATION (LS)
P-01 LIFT STATION NO. 12 REMOVALS
P-02 LIFT STATION NO. 12 PLAN & PROFILE
P-03 LIFT STATION DETAILS
E-01 LIFT STATION NO. 12 ELECTRICAL PLAN
THIS PLAN CONTAINS 6 SHEETS
ALL APPLICABLE FEDERAL, STATE. AND LOCAL LAWS AND ORDINANCES WILL BE COMPLIED
WITH IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT.
...
WSB
701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300
Minneapolis. MN 55416
www.wsbeng.com
& Associates, Inc.
7(}3.54HBOO-Fax76J.541.1700
INFRASTRUCTURE . ENGINEERING . PLANNING. CONSTRUCTION
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE
LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
ENGR.
11~ F -1)tJv/}'T/Wr-'
KEVIN F. NEWMAN, P.E.
DATE 06/11/2007
L1C. NO.
25198
APPROVED
CITY OF SHOREWOOD ENGINEER
Prepared for:
10. ~
f). i~I~1
"iili~
{ " ~J\J~I
~
~lSln\\I\,0"",l
~"i'
~lJ
~~
City of Shorewood
Dept. of Public Works and Engineering
5755 Country Club Rood
Shorewood. Minnesota 55331
(612) 474-3236
GEN
TITLE SHEET
SHEET
G-01
CONNECT TO EXISTING 4" CI
FORCE MAIN
REMOVE AND REPLACE 38 SY
BITUMINOUS AS NECCESSARY FOR
PROPOSED FORCEMAIN CONNECTION
PROTECT CONIFE.ROUS TREE!-
44 LF TREE PROTECTION FENCING
EMOVE AND REPLACE
EXISTING LIFT STATJON
CONTROL PANEL AND
CONTROLS:;
.6' TEMPORARY>:
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
11' -5" EXISTING
FORCEMAIN EASEMENT
12' EXISTING PRIVATE
ACCESS ROAD
8' TEMPORARY
EASEMENT
TEMPORARY
EASEMENT AREA
'=' 915 SF
REMOVE AND
REPLACE
EXISTING ROCKS
, (TYP.'4)
SILT FENCE
113 LF
12', TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
PROTECT EXISTING TREES -
25 LF TREE PROTECTION FENCING
1.
2
3
4,
i 5.
6,
7.
8,
OFT
10
20
'>;
TEMPORARY
EASEMENT AREA
'=' 249 SF
REMOVE AND REPLACE
EXISTING WET WELL
._'~ I i COVER SLAB
~~:"" : J"ISTING SANITARY SEWER
I EASEMENT
~ PROTECT DECIDUOUS TREE
,,','" \ . I, 32 LF TREE PROTECTION FENCING
.. , i ROPOSED TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
(WORK LIMITS)
GENERAL NOTES
CONTRACTOR SHAU. MAKE AN! ONSITE VISIT PRIOR BIDDING.
ALL DI~~ENSIONS SHALL BE FIELD VERIFIED BY CONmACTOR PRiOR
TO fJIDDING AiNY COiNSTRUCTION,
CON mACTOR BE RESPONSIBLE FQF, ALL SI TE li:JREP ARA TION
WORK.
ALL SITE RESTORATION WORK, INCLUDING REPLACEMENT OF ROAD
SURFACE AND SOD SHALL BE PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR.
RESTRAiN ~~ECHANICAL JOINTS,
SEE PLAN AND PROf'II.E SHEETS FOR PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER
TO EXiSTING INET WELL.
CONETI\CTOR SHALL BE RESPOiNSIBLE FOR ALL PIPE AND
NECESSARY TO CONiNECT TO EXISTING FORCE MAiN.
CONTRACTOR PUBUC AND PRIVATE ACCESS TO
I'\LL RESIDENCES CONSTRUCTION.
9. UNDERGROUND TOENCHING TO BE DONE BY DIRECTIONAL Di~ILUNG
OR CUTTER BAR TOENCHING, NO BUCKET EXCAVi\TION WILL BE
!\L1.0WED BETWEEN WET We-LL AND
g
i5~
~a
z
~y
o
w
~ V1
~
r TYPICAL STEEL
FENCE POST
ORAN GE
/CONSTRUCTION FENCE
AROUNO TREE DRIP
LINE-FASTEN TO
STEEL POSTS
o
~n <
.~ is -d
g~;i;! ~
~B~~ ~
8~~~ V
fb..:E~
>~"
~~S~ LL:
~~~~ 1
<~~i!' .
~>5~ ~
~~<~ )-
~~~2
~~~~
~~~~
~
z
~ ~ ~ y
~ m ~
I i I
'"
m
~
I I I
~
o
"
TREE PROTECTION DETAIL
z
~ C
<C 0
I- 0
~ 3:
:J w w
l1.NJ:D:::
0....1-0
zoa:::::I:
OZO(/)
- 11.
I- U.
~ 0
= >-
m ....
<C _
ffi ()
a:::
VARIE~
-VARIES V6RIES- I
NOTE:
REPLACE DRIVEWAY AS SHOWN UNLESS
DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY ENGINEER
2" BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE MnDOT LV4 2350
MnDOT 2357 BITUMINOUS TACK COAT
2" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE MnDOT LV3 2350
8" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE MODIFIED
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
DRIVEWAY DETAIL
SCALE: NONE
SEWAGE BYPASS SYSTRM NOU;:';;:
g~~
.~~~
Cl)ZJ::
.s~~~
o,~ I'
&18-
. ro
2 g?
. c
~~
ro
.~
X
THE SEWAGE BYPASS SYSTEM SHALL BE TOTAL
RESPONSIBIUTYOF THE CO:NmACTOR AND SHAU_ INCLUDE ALL
PiPING, EOUIPMENT FOR PUMPING AS REQUIRED, AN!D TEVPORARY
ELECTOIC SERVICE TO THE SYSTEV, THE CONTlV\CTOR SHALL
OPERATE, MAINTAIN, AND SmVICE THE SEWAG[ BYPi'\SS PUMPING
SYSTD;! AS NECESSARY TEMPORARY BYPi-\SS SYSTEM
SHALL THE [NG!NEER PRIOR TO
INSTALLATION,
o
~
2 A BYPASS PUMPING SYSTEM :S USED, THE PUMIJING CAPACITY
EOUAL THE OESIGN FLO\f,! OF THE UFT STATION,
~Iti
<4~1 !
BYPASS SYSTEM SHALL BE CONTINUOUS OR
ENSURE NO OR SEPAr~i\TION OF
SW
01608-05
LIFT S rATION NO. 12 EXISTING CONDITIONS
& SITE PLAN WITH EASEMENTS SHEET
C-01
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 07-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES
AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS ON THE
REHABILITATION OF LIFT STATION NO. 12 PROJECT,
CITY PROJECT NO. 06-01
WHEREAS, pursuant to a motion made by the City Council January 23,2006,
Plans, Specifications and Estimates for the design phase of City Project 06-01 were
prepared.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood, Minnesota:
1. Plans, Specifications and Estimates were prepared by WSB & Associates,
Inc., engineer for such improvement pursuant to Council action on January
23,2006. Said plans, specifications and estimates are hereby approved and
shall be filed with the City Clerk.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper
and in Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids, attached hereto as
Exhibit A, upon the making of such improvement under such approved
plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for 2
weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be
opened and considered by the Council at 10:00 a.m. on July 18, 2007, in
the City Hall Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered
unless sealed and filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit,
cashier's check bid bond, or certified check payable to the Clerk for 5
percent of the amount of each bid.
ADOPTED BY WE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD
this 11 th day of June, 2007.
ATTEST:
Christine Lizee, Mayor
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
REHABILITATION OF LIFT STATION NO. 12
CITY PROJECT NO. 06-01
FOR THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed bids will be received by the City of Shorewood at the office of the
City Clerk until 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, July 18, 2007, at Shorewood City Hall, 5755 Country Club Road,
Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, and will be publicly opened and read at said time and place by
representatives of the City of Shorewood. Said proposals for the furnishing of all labor and materials for
the construction, complete in-place, of the following approximate quantities:
1 LS
38 SY
16 TON
5 TON
5 TON
0.5 AC
Rehabilitation of Lift Station No. 12
Bituminous Pavement Removal
Aggregate Base Class 5
Type L V4 Wearing Course Mixture (B)
Type L V3 Non-Wearing Course Mixture (B)
Seeding
The bids must be submitted on the Proposal Forms provided in accordance with the Contract Documents,
Plans, and Project Manual as prepared by WSB & Associates, Inc., 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300,
Minneapolis, MN 55416, which are on file with the City Clerk of Shorewood and may be seen at the office
of the Consulting Engineers or at the office of the City Clerk.
Copies of Proposal Forms and the Plans and Specifications for use by contractors submitting a bid may be
obtained from the Consulting Engineers, WSB & Associates, Inc., 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300,
Minneapolis, MN 55416, upon deposit of Forty Dollars ($40.00) (non-refundable) per set.
Bids will only be accepted from Contractors who purchase paper Bidding Documents as specified above.
No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk of Shorewood and accompanied by
a cash deposit, cashier's check, or certified check, or bid bond made payable to the City of Shorewood for
five percent (5%) of the amount bid, to be forfeited as liquidated damages in the event that the bid be
accepted and the bidder fail to enter promptly into a written contract and furnish the required bond.
No bids may be withdrawn for a period of sixty (60) days from the date of opening of bids. The City of
Shorewood reserves the right to reject any or all bids.
DATED: June 11, 2007
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
sls Craig Dawson
City Clerk
Shorewood, MN
PUBLISHED IN THE: Sun Sailor Newspaper:
Construction Bulletin:
June 21, 2007 and June 28, 2007
June 18, 2007 and June 25, 2007
Attachment #2
REHABILITATION OF LIFT STATION NO.12
CITY PROJECT NO. 06-01
CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MN
WSB PROJECT NO. 1608-05
AFB
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator
June 7, 2007
Request for Public Hearing regarding Tax-Exempt Revenue Note
for Excelsior Covenant Church School
Steve Fenlon, principal of Midwest Health Care Capital, will explain the proposed up to a $3.0
million tax-exempt revenue note to be issued by the City of Deephaven for Excelsior Covenant
Church School in Shorewood.
Mr. Fenlon had made an inquiry on behalf of Excelsior Covenant Church about Shorewood's
willingness to issue the financing, in which the City acts as a conduit for financing to the SOl(e)3
organization. Shorewood, however, has issued $10 million in bonds in 2007, and any additional
bonds would not be "bank-qualified", and thus incur a higher rate of interest. On June 4, 2007, the
Deephaven City Council approved a resolution setting a public hearing for Deephaven to issue of the
bonds. As the project is physically located in the City of Shorewood, State statutes and Federal Code
require that the Shorewood City Council also hold a public hearing regarding the issuance of such
tax-exempt financing for Excelsior Covenant Church School.
As noted in the memorandum from Kennedy & Graven, the City of Shorewood's bond counsel, the
City of Shorewood is not a party to the proposed financing, and has no risk or exposure with the
revenue note or obligation issued by another jurisdiction.
City Council Action:
The City Council would need to adopt a resolution setting its public hearing on this matter in order
for the project to proceed. The parties are interested in beginning construction as soon as possible.
Given the public notice requirements, the earliest that a public hearing could be held is the Council's
regular meeting on July 9,2007. A resolution to this effect has been prepared for Council's
consideration.
~..
~ t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
..,
Kennedy
..
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis. MN 55402
(612) 337-9300 telephone
(612) 337-9310 fax
http://www.kennedy-graven.com
Mfirmative Action. Equal Opportunity Employer
C H ART ERE D
STEPHEN J. BUBUL
Attorney at Law
Direct Dial (612) 337-9228
Email: sbubul@kennedy-graven.com
June 6, 2007
Mr. Craig Dawson
City Administrator-Clerk
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, Minnesota 55331-8926
Re: City of Deephaven, $3,000,000 Economic Development Revenue Note, Series 2007
(Excelsior Covenant Church Project)
Dear Craig:
In regards to the above-referenced issue, the City Council of the City of Shorewood (the "City")
has been requested to conduct a public hearing and grant "host approval" for the issuance by the City of
Deephaven ("Deephaven") of tax-exempt private activity bonds that will finance a facility located in the
City. The public hearing and host approval are required by federal income tax law (Section l47(f) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the "Code")). The City Council will satisfy this request by conducting a
public hearing at its July 9, 2007 meeting and by the adoption of a resolution granting approval to the
financing transaction.
Section 147(f) of the Code and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereof (the
"Regulations"), require that tax-exempt private activity bonds must be approved by each governmental
unit having jurisdiction over the area in which any facility financed with such tax-exempt bonds is
located. The Code and Regulations provide that the tax-exempt bonds may be approved by an applicable
elected representative of the governmental unit after a public hearing following reasonable public notice
(defined to be published notice than 14 days before the public hearing). These public hearings are
typically conducted before the entire City Council and the approval is typically approved by resolution of
the City Council.
The issuer of tax-exempt private activity bonds loans the proceeds of the bonds to a qualified
nonprofit corporation, in this case Excelsior Covenant Church (the "Borrower"), who will use the bond
proceeds to assist in the financing of a project. The issuer then assigns the right to be repaid by the
Borrower under the loan to a trustee, who will collect repayment of the loan from the Borrower out of
project revenues. The process of loaning bond proceeds to a borrower and assigning the repayment rights
to a trustee eliminates the risk to the issuer of not collecting repayment for the loan of the bond proceeds.
Because there is limited risk to the issuer of tax-exempt private activity bonds under this scenario,
it follows that there is even less risk to the City under this transaction because the City is not issuing the
bonds. The City is only involved in the process because the project is located within its territory, and
1
therefore pursuant to the Code and the Regulations the City is required to give "host approval" to the
bond issue. Host approval is given through the procedures outlined above. In addition, the bonds do not
constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance upon any property of the City and the bonds will not be a charge
against the general credit or taxing powers of the City but wiII be payable from sums to be paid by the
Borrower pursuant to a loan agreement with Deephaven.
If you have any questions regarding the issues in this letter, please contact me.
Very truly yours,
ef}1i~u~~i/~
SJB~
2
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 07-
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON
THE ISSUANCE OF AN EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES REVENUE NOTE AND
AUTHORIZING THE PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE OF THE HEARING
(EXCELSIOR COVENANT CHURCH PROJECT)
(a) WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.1651, relating
to municipal industrial development (the "Act"), gives municipalities the power to issue revenue
obligations for the purpose of providing necessary educational facilities so that adequate educational
services are available to residents of the State at reasonable cost; and
(b) WHEREAS, the City of Deephaven, Minnesota ("Deephaven"), has received
from Excelsior Covenant Church, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation and 501(c)(3) organization (the
"Borrower"), a proposal that Deephaven undertake a program to assist in fmancing, among other
things, a Project described in Exhibit A which is located in the City of Shorewood, Minnesota (the
"City"), through the issuance of a revenue note or obligation (in one or more series) (the "Note")
pursuant to the Act; and
(c) WHEREAS, the City has been advised that a public hearing and City Council
approval of the financing of the Project is required under the Act and Section 147(f) of the Internal
Revenue Code because a portion of facilities to be financed by the Note are located in the City:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood, Minnesota, as follows:
1. A public hearing on the proposal of the Borrower will be held at the time and
place set forth in the Notice of Public Hearing attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2. The City Administrator-Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause
notice ofthe hearing to be given one publication in the official newspaper ofthe City and a newspaper
of general circulation available in the City, not less than 14 days nor more than 30 days prior to the
date fixed for the hearing, substantially in the form of the attached Notice of Public Hearing.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA,
this 11th day of June, 2007.
Christine Lizee, Mayor
ATTEST:
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator-Clerk
Exhibit A
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ON A PROPOSAL FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A
REVENUE NOTE FOR THE EXCELSIOR COVENANT CHURCH PROJECT
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota (the
"City") will meet at the City Hall, 5755 Country Club Road, in the City, at 7:00 p.m. on Monday,
July 9, 2007, to consider giving host approval to the issuance by the City of Deephaven,
Minnesota ("Deephaven") of a revenue obligation, in one or more series, under Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.1651 (the "Act"), in order to finance the cost of a project
located in the City.
The Project consists of the construction and equipping of an approximately 21,700 square
foot, two-story addition to, including 3 classrooms, an activity center, and renovation of the
existing school facility located at 199955 Excelsior Boulevard in the City. The Project will be
owned and operated by the Borrower.
The maximum estimated principal amount of the Note to be issued to finance the Project
is $3,000,000.
The note or other obligation, as and when issued, will not constitute a charge, lien or
encumbrance upon any property of the City and such obligation will not be a charge against the
general credit or taxing powers of the City but will be payable from sums to be paid by the
Borrower pursuant to a revenue agreement.
At the time and place fixed for the Public Hearing, the City Council will give all persons
who appear at the hearing an opportunity to express their views with respect to the proposal.
Written comments will be considered if submitted at the above City office on or before the date
of the hearing.
[Publish no later than June 25, 2007]
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, 5 JUNE 2007
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
· 15 May 2007
Acting Chair Gagne; Commissioners Geng, Gniffke
Nielsen; and Council Liaison Woodruff
Acting Chair Gagne called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Absent:
Chair Schmitt and Commissioner Hutchins
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Ruoff moved, Gniffke seconded, Approving tIi
2007 as presented. Motion passed 4/0/1 with Me
Meeting Minutes of 15 May
his absence at the meeting.
1.
Acting Chair Gagne opened t
Hearing. He explained items rec
June 11, 2007, Regular City Counc
., noting the procedures utilized in a Public
that evening would be tentatively placed on a
or further review and consideration.
Director Nielsen expl
Excelsior Covenan
structures (a uti!'
Covenant, propose
Two-Family Residenti
and Mr. Turnquist had r
of the City's Zoning Code
sory structures located on the northeast corner of the
t 19955 Excelsior Boulevard. The smaller of the two
replacement, and Jim Turnquist, representing Excelsior
ewhat larger one. The property was zoned R-2A, Single and
uctures for churches were conditional uses in residential districts,
ditional use permit (C.D.P.), pursuant to Section 1201.14 Subd. 4.
Nielsen went on to explain th ubject property was located between Excelsior Boulevard and Highway 7
and contained nearly 7.6 acres of land. The replacement building would be located in the same spot as
the structure being replaced. The style and materials of the building would be similar to the existing two-
car garage it would be located next to.
Nielsen stated Section 1201.14 Subd. 4. of the City's Zoning Code referred back to section R-1B. He
explained how the proposed structure complied with requirements set forth in Section 1201.11 Subd. 4.b
of the Code.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
5 June 2007
Page 2 of 6
a. Side yards for church facilities are required to be double that which is normally
required for the zoning district. The proposed building will be 20 feet from the east
side ofthe property, in compliance with the setback requirement.
b. The site for the building was in a wooded area in the northeast corner of the
property. Despite being somewhat larger than the existing structure, the
replacement structure should fit into the same space with very little site alteration.
c. The proposed building neither takes up existing parking spaces nor necessitates
additional parking.
Nielsen stated because the applicant's request was considered to be consistent with the requirements of
the City's Zoning Code, Staff recommended that the conditional use permit be granted as requested.
Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this case, Acting Chair Gagne opened and closed the
Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:05 P.M.
In response to a question from Acting Chair Gagne, Director Nielsen stated the City had not received any
comment regarding the C.U.P. request from the neighboring property owners.
Gniffke moved, Meyer seconded, Recommending Approval of the Conditional Use Permit for an
Accessory Structure for Excelsior Covenant Church, 19955 Excelsior Boulevard. Motion passed
5/0.
Acting Chair Gagne closed the Public Hearing at 7:07 P.M.
2. 7:10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING FENCE
REQUIREMENTS FOR SWIMMING POOLS
Applicant: Blair and Sharon Bury
Location: 28160 Boulder Bridge Drive
Acting Chair Gagne opened the Public Hearing at 7:12 P.M.
Acting Chair Gagne commented that the topic of pool fences had been discussed and debated in great
depth in the past.
Director Nielsen explained Blair and Sharon Bury had recently constructed a swimming pool on their
property located at 28160 Boulder Bridge Drive. Pursuant to Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.f.(8) of the Zoning
Code, they were required to enclose the pool with a four-foot, non-climbable fence with self-closing
gates. It was the applicants' intent to fence their entire rear yard with a five-foot fence, rather than simply
enclose the pool area, except for where their lot abuts a pond at the northwest corner of their property.
The applicants had applied for a Zoning Code text amendment that would recognize the water feature
(i.e., the pond) as a barrier in lieu of the required fence. In their request letter the applicants referenced an
automatic closing pool cover as additional protection against children inadvertently falling into the pool.
The applicants' concerns with the fencing requirement were that it obstructed their view of the pond and
created a barrier for wildlife coming up from the pond.
Nielsen went on to explain the subject property was zoned Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.), subject to
R-1AlS zoning standards. The property contained 58,980 square-feet of area and was occupied by the
Bury's home and the new swimming pool. The property dropped off between the house and the pond; the
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
5 June 2007
Page 3 of6
elevation changed by as much as seventeen feet. The proposed grading created a terraced effect from the
pool area to the pond.
With regard to the analysis of the case, Nielsen stated that with any zoning text amendment one of the
first things Staff did was research what other cities did with respect to the regulation in question. The
Staff checked what the cities of Chanhassen, Minnetonka, Eden Prairie, Plymouth and Maple Grove did.
None of those cities allowed pool covers as an alternative to fencing. Two of those cities' ordinances
referenced alternatives to fencing (e.g., buildings and walls). In discussing pool covers with those cities'
staffs, the common response was concern that nothing guaranteed that the pool will be closed whenever
the pool was not in use. He acknowledged the applicants' pool cover was a safety feature when it was
closed; it was strong enough to support people standing on it. He commented that in the applicants
request letter they stated that several local communities had eliminated the pool fencing requirement.
Nielsen explained there were issues with respect to the pond being recognized as a barrier in lieu of the
fence. First, the pond could be subject to fluctuation in level. Because the fence could be placed in a
wetland, there was no way to ensure that someone could not get around the fence when the water level in
the pond was low. There was some indication that previous owners of the property may have altered the
wetland boundary. The wetland area adjoining the open water ended abruptly at the applicants' lot. With
regard to providing an area for wildlife coming up from the pond, there was nothing that required the
fence to immediately abut the pond. The fence could be placed further east of the pond if that was the
concern.
Nielsen stated the applicants' property had been platted before the current wetland regulations (which
went into effect in 1994), and therefore it was subject to the old regulations. The old regulations allowed a
property to be platted right up to the wetland shoreline. The applicants clarified they owned part of the
pond. Nielsen then stated the current regulations required a natural 35-foot buffer and a 15-foot setback
from the buffer. He related that in the applicants' request letter they stated an individual would have to
swim through a soft-bottom pond to get into their yard.
With regard to the applicants' concern of obstructing view, Nielsen stated the applicants' property
dropped off toward the pond. Their terrace was shaped such that a fence placed at the toe of the first drop
would place the fence approximately four feet below the level of the pool deck. Also, there were fences
available that were less obtrusive than others and that blended into the landscape better. Those types of
fences were frequently used by lake shore owners concerned with their views of the water.
Nielsen stated the issue of swimming pool fences was last discussed in 2003, and in 1995 before that. In
both instances, the provisions regarding pool fencing was upheld. In fact, the consensus in 1995 was that
nonconforming pool fences should be brought into conformity. Shorewood's current requirements were
well-founded in concern over safety. As such, Staff recommended that no change be made to the Code at
this time.
Nielsen stated the applicants' had provided information on what six local cities required with regard to
pool fences. He commented that he had just received the information and therefore he had not had time to
review those cities' ordinances.
Blair Bury, one of the applicants, stated he had met with Director Nielsen to decide if he and his wife
should request a variance or should they try and resolve the problem in some other way. Mr. Bury stated
Nielsen suggested it made more sense to pursue a text amendment to the Zoning Code.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
5 June 2007
Page 4 of 6
Mr. Bury stated his wife had researched the pool fencing regulations of Deephaven, Orono, Minnetonka
Beach, Tonka Bay, Mound and Wayzata, six local cities. He reviewed the findings of her research. The
cities of Deephaven, Minnetonka Beach, and Orono have no pool fencing regulations. Mound approved a
variance in 2006 that allowed a property owner to fence to the waters edge. Tonka Bay and Wayzata
required a fence perimeter to the water's edge only.
Mr. Bury made the following clarifications about the pond. The pond was a private pond and it was
maintained by the Boulder Bridge Homeowners Association. There was no public access to the pond. No
motorized boats were allowed on the pond. The water level of the pond was controlled; in the
approximate ten years they had lived on the property, they had not seen the pond water level drop more
than 2 - 3 inches below its highest level. The pond was a soft-bottom pond.
Mr. Bury stated their concern with the obstruction of view if the fence were to go along the pond was an
issue for them as well as some of their neighbors.
With regard to safety, Mr. Bury stated they wanted to be safe and they wanted to avoid any potential with
uninvited people having access to their pool. He stated they proposed a permanent fence to the pond's
edge. If that were the case, an individual would have to access their yard through the soft-bottom pond.
He then stated a fence would not prohibit an individual from accessing their property if the individual was
driven to do so. Mr. Bury explained that the literature on their pool cover stated the cover was a safety
device, and he had seen very large individuals stand on one. The cover often was referred to as a
horizontal fence. He stated it was their intent to have the cover on their pool when it was not in use or
when they were not home; although, he acknowledged that it would be possible to forget to cover the
pool.
Mr. Bury suggested the text amendment be specific to private ponds or situations similar to this one.
Mr. Bury stated if the request for a text amendment was not approved, they would comply with the
existing regulations and fence the area to the edge of the pond.
Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this case, Acting Chair Gagne opened and closed the
Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:25 P.M.
In response to a question from Commissioner Meyer, Director Nielsen stated that the two cities' the Staff
researched that referenced alternatives to fencing in their ordinances did not allow a pool cover as an
alternative. In response to another question, Nielsen stated in the ordinances the Staff researched he did
not see any reference to allowing a natural barrier to substitute for a fence. He again stated Staff had not
researched the ordinances of the six local cities Ms. Bury had researched.
Commissioner Geng stated he assumed one of the reasons for a pool fence was safety of small children.
In this circumstance there was an open pond that children could access, and a small child would have to
walk through the pond to access the Bury's property. Director Nielsen stated that in discussions regarding
pool fences in 2003 it was stated that a pond had a gradual drop off and a pool was more drastic.
Commissioner Gniffke expressed concern about the ramifications of changing the pool-fence regulation
in the Zoning Code; if the Code was amended it could allow for the opportunity to have many pools that
would not have pool fences.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
5 June 2007
Page 5 of6
Commissioner Meyer shared Gniffke's concern with amending the Code. He questioned how other
ordinances had been drafted to allow for a natural barrier without making the regulation too broad. There
may other situations where the pond did not have the same characteristics as the pond on the Bury's
property .
Commissioner Geng questioned how many properties in the City would be able to have a fence next to a
wetland edge. Director Nielsen stated only those properties that had been platted before 1994, the year the
wetland-buffer regulations were adopted.
In response to a question from Commissioner Ruoff, Director Nielsen stated the suggested text
amendment would only apply to a property platted before 1994. Any property platted after that could not
have a fence next to the wetland. There was comment that the majority of City properties were platted
before 1994.
Councilmember Woodruff questioned why a variance was not being discussed; it would be easier to be
more restrictive in a variance and it would apply to the Bury's property only. Director Nielsen stated it
would be quite difficult to prove hardship, which was required with a variance. Nielsen stated it was
possible for the Bury's to locate the fence in a different spot, such as the terraced area near the pool.
Acting Chair Gagne again stated that in 2003 and 1995 there had been a great deal of discussion with
regard to the pool fencing regulation. A lot of thought and consideration had gone into the existing
regulation. He commented that the Zoning Code could be changed if it was deemed appropriate. He stated
he had a fence in his back yard and his back yard abutted a swamp, yet wildlife have not had any problem
accessing his property.
Commissioner Gniffke asked the applicant if there were other properties in the area that had pools and
fences near the wetland. Mr. Burt stated he did not know.
Mr. Bury clarified it was not their intent to ask for a change that would be applicable to the entire City.
He felt their property was unique because of the soft-bottom private pond. He stated a variance would be
acceptable, as would an amendment that would only apply to properties similar to theirs.
Commissioner Meyer stated he was reluctant to amend the Zoning Code.
Commissioner Geng moved, Gniftke seconded, Recommending Denial of the City Zoning Code
Text Amendment with Regard to Fence Requirements for Swimming Pools for Blair and Sharon
Bury, 28160 Boulder Bridge Drive. Motion passed 5/0.
Acting Chair Gagne clarified that the Planning Commission was a recommending body only. The City
Council would take formal action on the request.
Mr. Bury questioned if it would be more appropriate to request a variance. Director Nielsen explained that
the applicants could amend their application to request a variance before it came before Council for
action. There would have to be notice given of the public hearing for the revised application. Nielsen
stated it would be difficult to prove hardship.
Acting Chair Gagne closed the Public Hearing at 7:42 P.M.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
5 June 2007
Page 6 of6
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
4. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA
Director Nielsen stated there would be continued discussion of Planning District 6 at the Planning
Commission Meeting scheduled for June 19, 2007. He also stated there may be one C.U.P. for
consideration which had a structure on the property which would be considered for preservation as a
historic structure.
Nielsen commented that the Shorewood Yacht Club (SYC) owners had related to him that in the near
future they would be before the Commission with a request to allow some of the SYC's slips to be used
for power boats. The SYC owners had engaged the services of the University of Minnesota to conduct a
study regarding the community's need to have access for power boats.
5. REPORTS
. . Liaison to Council
Commissioner Gagne reported on matters considered and actions taken at a May 29, 2007, Regular City
Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Councilmember Woodruff reported on the
May 142007, Council work session meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting).
· SLUC
No report was given.
· Other
None.
6. ADJO~ENT
Meyer moved, Gniffke seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of 5 June 2007 at
7:51 P.M. Motion passed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, 15 MAY 2007
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Chair Schmitt; Commissioners Gagne, Geng, Gniffke, Hutchins, and Ruoff; Planning
Director Nielsen; and Council Liaison Wellens
Absent:
Commissioner Meyer
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
· 1 May 2007
Gagne moved, Geng seconded, Approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of
1 May 2007 as presented. Motion passed 6/0.
1. DISCUSS PLANNING DISTRICT 6
Director Nielsen explained that this was a study session, and it would be a very informal meeting.
Director Nielsen stated at the 1 May 2007 Planning Commission study session it was agreed that the next
step in the discussion of the commercial end of Planning District 6 would be to invite the commercial
property owners in that District and the owners of the commercial properties located on south side of
County Road 19 to come before the Planning Commission to discuss their visions. The area under
discussion includes the following commercial sites: 1) the Shorewood Yacht Club (SYC) (zoned L-R,
Lakeshore Recreational; its multiple dock facility was a conditional use); 2) the Minnetonka Portable
Dredging Company (zoned C-2); 3) the South Lake Office Building (zoned R-C, Residential
Commercial; the office building was a conditional use); 4) the Garden Patch Nursery (zoned C-2); and 5)
the property between the South Lake Office Building and the Garden Patch Nursery (zoned C-2).
Nielsen went on to state that discussion of redevelopment possibilities for the SYCproperty began in
2005 when the SYC was put up for sale. The SYC had been purchased by new owners since that time;
therefore. the interest in the property had subsided. The City's Comprehensive Plan and Code do not
reflect any potential changes to the area, although it would be likely that there would eventually be
changes to how the area was developed.
Nielsen explained that the C-2 District (which had previously been named the C-4 District) was a
specialized district that was established to address existing industrial uses in the area. The L-R District
was intended to address the existing multiple dock facilities (the SYC and Howard's Point Marina) and to
create standards for that zoning district. The L-R District was fairly flexible, and the District accepted
existing deficiencies. The L-R District was not intended to be expanded.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
15 May 2007
Page 2 of5
Nielsen then stated Gabriel Jabbour and Mike Maloney (partners in the SYC business), Tom Niccum
(Minnetonka Portable Dredging owner), and Tom Lingo (Garden Patch owner and owner of the old
Crepeau Dock property) were present this evening. Todd Frostad (the South Lake Office Building
developer) put his comments in writing.
Gabriel Jabbour stated that it was his intent and the intent of his partner Mr. Maloney to run a first class
conforming yacht club and to do so in a manner that was suitable for the surrounding community. Jabbour
commented that the SYC was not doing well from a fmancial perspective. He also commented that he was
a strong advocate oflife-cycle housing. Although it was his and Mr. Maloney's plan to maintain the SYC
and to pass that business on down to future generations, that plan could change. He stated he thought it
would be beneficial for the City to have identified standards regarding what the requirements would be to
develop the property differently. The SYC property was an ideal site for public access.
Mr. Jabbour stated that he and Mr. Maloney wanted the site to remain legally conforming. Sometime
during the next two - three years, they would approach the City with a request to allow some of the
SYC's slips to be used for power boats; they did not think it would have been appropriate to bring that
request forward while the City had been in litigation with the Upper Lake Minnetonka Yacht Club. Mr.
Jabbour explained that the SYC had engaged the services of the University of Minnesota to conduct a
study regarding the need for the community to have access for power boats; allowing power boats at the
SYC would also infuse cash into the SYC. He commented that the SYC had provided two slips (for no
cost) to two premier rigging supply companies with the hope that they could help reintroduce sailing into
the Lake Minnetonka area. Mr. Jabbour stated that he and Mr. Maloney applauded the City's effort to
create a long-term vision for the area.
Mr. Jabbour stated he and Tom Niccum had a very positive working relationship.
Chair Schmitt summarized Mr. Jabbour's comments. He stated that the SYC owners planned to remain a
sailing yacht cl hey wanted to remain legally conforming, and they had considered making a public
donation to the In'iR for a public access.
Mr. Jabbour stated there were five public access sites on Lake Minnetonka, and four of the sites were
located in Orono. He commented that Orono shared a border or bay with eleven of the thirteen other Lake
Minnetonka cities. He stated the State had previously committed to having 700 lake-access parking
spaces.
Chair Schmitt noted that if the SYC owners wanted their property to be zoned to something other than L-
R, it would create a nonconforming situation.
Mr. Jabbour stated he thought the property could be rezoned to high residential, while still allowing the
SYC and the Minnetonka Dredging Company to remain legally conforming. If they were to become
nonconforming they could not expand; State statute would not allow that. He commented that over time
nonconforming uses should eventually disappear.
Bill Niccum stated that he wanted his Minnetonka Dredging Company to remain at its current location.
There had been occasions where he had been approached regarding the sale of his property. If his plans
were to ever change he would want to work with Mr. Jabbour to see if they could sell both properties at
the same time. He commented his son Tom Niccum ran the company at this time.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
15 May 2007
Page 3 of 5
Tom Lingo stated he and his wife did not have any plans at this time to cease owning or operating the
Garden Patch. He then stated the property should be zoned such that it would allow future owners to have
some creativity regarding how they would develop the properties.
Commissioner Gagne stated that the SYC and Minnetonka Portable Dredging properties both currently
used a driveway off of County Road 19 to access their properties; the driveway crossed over the
Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA) LRT Trail, and it was there by license from the
HCRRA. Although West Lake Street served a residential neighborhood in Excelsior, the portion of West
Lake Street that could provide access into Shorewood was blocked off (but not vacated). He questioned
what would happen if the HCRRA revoked the license. Director Nielsen stated that West Lake Street was
a public roadway, and any planning would have to anticipate that West Lake Street would be opened and
used as a public access. Mr. Jabbour stated that he had an easement over the Minnetonka Portable
Dredging property to access West Lake Street; SYC's address was West Lake Street. Mr. Jabbour then
stated that Mr. Niccum had gated the access to his property from West Lake Street; and the HCRAA had
granted access across the LRT trail to the SYC only. Nielsen commented that the Minnetonka Portable
Dredging property next to West Lake Street had not been abandoned; the access to West Lake Street had
been temporarily blocked off.
Director Nielsen stated the discussion of Planning District 6 would be continued to the next study session.
He clarified that the City's Comprehensive Plan had to be resubmitted in 2008 and the intent was to
submit the Plan in June 2008.
Chair Schmitt noted that Mr. Frostad had submitted his vvritten comments regarding the future use of the
property in the area. Mrs. Lingo stated that she and her husband had not had any conversations with Mr.
Frostad about his vision.
In response to a question from Mrs. Lingo, Director Nielsen explained that the City was not trying to
change the zoning of the properties in the area. He commented if the current zoning remained in place for
the next 20 years the City would not have any objection to that. Although the City may not have chosen to
have Minnetonka Portable Dredging at its current location if it was starting with undeveloped property,
the company was recognized as a valuable asset to the area in the Comprehensive Plan and it did provide
a valuable service to the Lake Minnetonka communities. The City was considering the future of the area
because of the inquiries it had received about the properties in the past; it was not instigating a change.
Chair Schmitt stated the City had to look at long range considerations for the area.
2. DISCUSS CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING mSTORIC NON-CONFORMING
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
Director Nielsen explained that the City's Code required nonconforming accessory structures be brought
into conformity with current zoning standards. That action typically occurred when a property owner
requested a conditional use permit (C.D.P.) for accessory space in excess of 1,000 feet or 1,200 feet,
depending on the zoning district the property was located in. Earlier in 2007 the City adopted an
amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code which were intended to provide for the
preservation of certain nonconforming accessory structures, provided it could be demonstrated that the
structures were of historic, architectural or cultural value. A special ad hoc committee, under the Planning
Commission, had been established to review and comment on cases where exceptions to current standards
were requested. The committee consisted of the Planning Director, one Councilmember, one Planning
Commissioner, and one Park Commissioner. The amendment also required that the structure shall meet
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
15 May 2007
Page 4 of5
one or more criteria established by the City, criteria that were patterned after the National Park Service
standards for historic designation.
Nielsen stated Staff had reviewed a number of preservation codes and proposed a list of preservation
criteria. Staff recommended that in addition to the age and condition requirements set forth in the Code,
the ad hoc committee would evaluate candidate structures for preservation based on the condition that
they would meet one or more of the following criteria.
1. The character, interest or value of the structure is part of the development, heritage,
or cultural characteristics of the community;
2. The structure is the location of a significant local, county, state or national event;
3. The structure identifies with a person or persons significantly contributing to the
local, county, state or national history;
4. The structure embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style
valuable for the study of a period, type, method of construction, or the use of
indigenous materials;
5. The structure was the work of an architect, landscape architect, or master builder
whose work has influenced development in the county, state or nation;
6. The structure is an example of either architectural or structural innovation;
7. The proposed structure has archaeological significance;
8. The structure relates to other distinctive structures or sites which would also be
determined to be of historic significance; and
9. The structure must have been built prior to 2 August 1956; however, age alone
does not necessarily confer a special historical, architectural or cultural
significance, value or interest.
In response to a question from Chair Schmitt, Director Nielsen stated the criteria would be adopted into a
policy; they would not be included in the Code. It was easier to amend a policy than the Code.
In response to a question from Commissioner Geng, Director Nielsen stated that when researching what
other cities had done, two cities had included their preservation criteria in their city code and one city had
adopted it in a policy. Nielsen stated it was possible to incorporate the policy into the Code after the
policy had been in effect for a while and it was proven to be effective.
Commissioner Gniffre questioned the requirement in the Code amendment that a nonconforming
accessory structure had to have been built before 2 August 1956 if it was to be considered for
preservation. Director Nielsen explained the City's Code went into effect on 2 August 1956; therefore,
any building constructed prior to that date would have been a legal structure.
Councilmember Callies questioned if the Code should be amended to also include a specific age that a
structure could be to be considered for preservation (e.g. a minimum of 50 years old); 30 years from now
it may be appropriate to consider a 50-year-old structure for preservation. It was stated there may be
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
15 May 2007
Page 5 of5
relatively unknown architects and builders today that would become renowned in the future whose
structures should be preserved.
Chair Schmitt stated that from his perspective the language in criterion #8 was too broad. It would allow
property owners to say structures have a relationship to other structures, but in reality had little to do with
each other from a historical perspective. He then stated he would like to eliminate criterion #8. He also
stated he thought criterion #5 was too broad. Commissioner Ruoff stated criteria #5 may be broad, but for
a starting point that criterion did not seem unreasonable. Commissioner Geng stated it was not possible to
know which architects and builders would be renowned in the future.
After additional discussion, there was consensus to eliminate criterion #8.
Director Nielsen explained that the ad hoc committee's recommendation on a structure considered for
preservation would be considered by the Planning Commission, which in turn would forward a
recommendation to the Council.
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
4. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA
Director Nielsen stated there was a Conditional Use Permit for Excelsior Covenant Church slated for the
5 June 2007 Planning Commission Meeting Agenda.
5. REPORTS
. Liaison to Council
Commissioner Gagne reported on matters considered and actions taken at a May 14,2007, Regular City
Council Meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Councilmember Callies reported on the May
142007, Council work session meeting.
SLUC
No report given.
· Other
Director Nielsen provided background on and an update of the Upper Lake Minnetonka Yacht Club
matter.
6. ADJOURNMENT
Gniffke moved, Gagne seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of 15 May 2007 at
8:10 P.M. Motion passed 6/0.
RESPECTFULLYSUBNUTTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD' SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927' (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years · 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Brad Nielsen
DATE:
1 June 2007
RE:
Excelsior Covenant Church - C.D.P. for Accessory Building
FILE NO.
405(07.03)
BACKGROUND
There are two accessory structures located on the Excelsior Covenant Church property, located at
19955 Excelsior Boulevard (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). The smaller of the
two is in need of replacement, and Jim Turnquist, representing Excelsior Covenant, proposes to
replace it with a somewhat larger one. The property is zoned R-2A, Single and Two-Family
Residential. Churches and structures accessory thereto, are conditional uses in residential
districts, and Mr. Turnquist has requested a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 1201.14
Subd. 4. of the Shorewood Zoning Code.
The subject property is located between Excelsior Boulevard and Highway 7 and contains nearly
7.6 acres ofland. As shown on Exhibit B, the replacement building will be located in the
northeast comer of the site. The new building will be placed where the "existing shed" is shown.
The style and materials of the building are illustrated on Exhibit C and will be similar to the
existing two-car garage next to it.
ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION
Section 1201.14 Subd. 4. refers back to the R-1B section of the Zoning Code. Churches are
subject to the conditions set forth in Section 1201.10 Subd. 4.b.. Following is how this
application complies with those requirements:
1.
Side yards for church facilities are required to be double that which is normally required
for the zoning district. The proposed building will be 20 feet from the east side of the
property, in compliance with the setback requirement.
#tr
.. . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
....
#8.A.
Memorandum
Re: Excelsior Covenant Church c.u.P.
1 June 2007
2. The site for the building is in a wooded area in the northeast comer of the property.
Despite being somewhat larger than the existing shed, it should fit into the same space
with very little site alteration.
3. The proposed building neither takes up existing parking spaces nor necessitates additional
parking.
Based upon the preceding, it is recommended that the conditional use permit be approved as
requested.
Cc: Craig Dawson
Tim Keane
Jim Turnquist
-2-
~I
s
~
~}i
CHRISTMAS
LAKE
800
o
800 Feet
I
t\
N
Exhibit A
SITE LOCATION
ExcelsIOr Covenant Church - C.D.P.
CIl - I'T'I
r:;; I ~
o ~ >< 9'?oJ '1>"01
k"{)OI
' ~ "
III (") 0101
~ III
o X I'T'I
o () r- /
o III
. r (J)
~ ~
- 0 -
~ ;; 0
III
IIIJ ::0
o 0
.; c
) r
III
" < C")
" )
h 0
- 0
<
I'T'I
Z
:r;:.
Z
....
C")
=
c::
::0
(")
=
o(,c,
,..""
4l\".. .....
Ooo(
1."
-:0.1
."- "",,
.....
.54. ,,(/6
"""
~ it.b
....
\.
\\'"
. \ " .
. "
. '. '\
., \
\ \ "
""
'"
'"
'"
o
3: ..
- ..
%0
:z; ""
:: m
o ;:
:z; ~
" -
>..
- '"
>
3: -
- ..
:z; ;;;
:z;
..m,.
""'0
~~>
..,..",
\-tt\-ml \ i
(02:1 )
1""\1 )t'dv"
(f"dl")lJ.~ ,L."v,",;I.., '9
\
\.
I.
\
,\ \
\ \, '\
" .' \
.... ,I .. -\ 'I
\ '. ,..\
"\~
. ----.:.:-:..::-..:.:=-=-:~~O_r:;:t.\1 (:J;":::-"':""'_,;:
'>lO/dt<V 'i'Tn::l......w/l4'.v..:.....~..,O\olj. :,:CC' ..
-t<<7" -?NI.t..}C1I' 'llCl'lSiI'J..':t;l :.~"".~.::::::::::
.f,.,..,....."...~(TIJnq NO
'H1LU~11 )..J.l'dl1:>'!1\O 'Vt<O,;.IOOV :.;.01'1
" \:~
I ,
; (dl
'~'t""-"'- - ~",un..
!
. .
1
,I\UJJ..')(hL. '7fiIJ...IH;\'I' 'WOI't:;.J,.)(.:S ~"'fJ.yrx;r
....... '_~O...,C.J.'II;.r-
;..~.;;...~.;,:.n '<l1'1V1l wU>'<
,',"'rd fj' ,U1<;t<;Ij.><l "1<1~"'''ln .
. ---C.:.:.:::':";::::::'?~Or!iZ: ~')IOl<J.dV .
~'i'6nJ::rI::l '?'...Il.1H~I' ')l'1'1tMi01Sii :..
@
-q..
\
.
,-,0'; 'J.d~ -S3l10,l....',(
'O'1V>! "lV;'__", M OOj>-wr
'::1',/ t ',).U~N;l.l.tl' ~rllLU?11
, "'::':?'O ';oar::llP>l:.!:.!V-:
~.~OJ.')u-~ '9I'lllJ<~VIl'dV-'"
9!iIIol'dVd r J.,.VMO'lO'd '
*
,^<Jt'T~t<'J.SI";;t..cD
<;:;7\:1.J. .
'-
-.!l
8'0<31.... AS
I
I
1
I
~
~
-'
~
...
\,
~
c::;J@
(2)"
2)"=
c::=
~
@
@
~
@:i)
"" / ~"."i<'
", .. '.,,,,,,,iclJ.:.;I::;;C,M 1''1
,-;--:;vf\i1 .1'dL ~ a.1- v-aoOf'{'i'd
.. V' J-":...."".~a~...
'. '11, .'
'~'
~
~
O~)
\,
\
" \'..
"'-- 'Y
"" ~ \~
'(\ \ \ 'y'
C ~\ \~
. \~
\~
\
\
\
V
~
~
-- ~~
S ~
-;;;'
~~
:-~~
.,
oJ) ~id ~
~ 0 p,.,a. ~
"
~-tJ
'0
~"
)........0 I"v~ Oi'"<; .'- t.,fOIJ..loav f"^:ill"" t..\,'D
,?}"4\ani?NI 0""1;1 '3?'<3f1'-fl~ 'l.~Y'd9"'Y' ~3J,.'V:1~~:
~-;L.19 -dO "';/'lfV 1.<6;t.,,^ H -,.., ~ ,
....:;f O...\... aadl.c:i *' a-a~~~.L(1,?' yg:')jy dOO.. M3N..
~~Vt1'''O'"~a 77Y~"t:1n~ fSV:J'k::V C"'f'O~ ,..,NI)'f':lVd ~~~
:a3NIY..L.tilV\Jf ~! ....~J..IS 2.H.l ~;N~~; ~~~::M :HU.
dNV'1 !,^01 ).'d3A "'" rU.. O.L -;:r. : .,.--;;.,LOt{ ':<19"q"t"nY'dCl
~ll>
Q~I>
~~~
,,,
r\
\
"s"O&
~ 3'V:>S lVnS'^ I
,0
= .. L =3'''o'':::)S I
1"-.1"'O"'.d 3J....IS
~~~"^~
~Y\'H
'3 .,'Z!ic; at'!
'r\O~~~'~
~b'O~-?
,
....:;
J.; ~,
, ,
Exhibit B
SITE PLAN
GUIDE To AsSIST You WITH YOUR
E-Z FRAME SHED
(1. GENERAL )
Prior to beginning
construction, the
area selected for
the shed location
must be leveled
and cleared of
obstructions.
(2. INVENTORY )
Separate all lum-
ber, hardware, etc.
into individual
stacks of like
items.
Unfold each frame, setting aside
two frames to be used as end
walls. From 1"x4" Pine boards,
cut Gusset plates 6" long. Use 4
plates per interior frame and 2
per endwall frame. Apply gusset
plates on each side of the top and
bottom fold locations. Frames to
be used as end walls require only
one gusset plate at top and bot-
tom on the side opposite of the
metal plates. Use four 8D nails
on each gusset plate. Sre.Ffglre 1.
I Figure 1.1
'------------------------------t-
139-1/2"
long gusset
plate at top
fold location
Side Wall Frame
Member
PLEASE NOTE: This shed construction aid is intended solely to pro-
vide general knowledge as to one of the ways a shed may be con-
structed using materials available from Menards. We suggest you
cbeck with your local building officials regarding site location, pernelit
procedures, safety regulations and specifications of materials used to
construct your new storage shed. Builders who utilize this aid must
proceed at their own risk and are solely responsible for complying
with all building codes which pertain in their community. Menards
hereby disclaims all liability for any damages whether consequential,
incidental, special or otherwise, which may result from following this
do-it-yourself aid.
Treated 2"x4"
Bottom Frame
Member
1 "x4"x6"
A long gusset plate
at bottom fold
location
97-3/8"
I
1-1/2"
~.
,
12'-
Exhibit C
PROPOSED BUILDING
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927. (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128. www.ci.shorewood.mn.us. cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Brad Nielsen
DATE:
31 May 2007
RE:
Bury Proposed Zoning Code Amendment - Swimming Pool Fences
FILE NO.
405(07.04)
BACKGROUND
Blair and Sharon Bury have recently constructed a swimming pool on their property at 28160
Boulder Bridge Drive (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). Pursuant to Section
1201.03 Subd. 2.f.(8) of the Zoning Code, they are required to enclose the pool with a four-foot,
nonclimbab1e fence with self-closing gates. Rather than simply enclose the pool area, the Bury's
choose to fence their entire rear yard, except for where their lot abuts a pond at the northwest
comer of their property. The location of the pool and the pond are illustrated on Exhibits Band
C, attached. They have applied for a Zoning Code text amendment that would recognize the
water feature as a barrier in lieu of the required fence. In their request letter (Exhibit D) they also
reference an automatic closing pool cover as additional protection against children inadvertently
falling into the pool. Their concerns with the fencing requirement is that it obstructs their view
of the pond and creates a barrier for wildlife coming up from the pond.
The subject property is zoned P.U.D., subject to R-1AJS zoning standards. The property contains
58,980 square feet of area and is occupied by the Bury's home and the new swimming pool. As
shown on Exhibits Band C, the property drops off between the house and the pond, changing
elevation as much as 17 feet. The proposed grading shown on Exhibit C, creates a terraced effect
from the pool area to the pond.
ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION
With any zoning text amendment, one of the first things staff does is to research what other cities
do with respect to the regulation in question. Although the applicants state that several
communities have eliminated the pool fencing requirement in instances where automatic covers
,.
'" . PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
..,.,
#8,8.
Memorandum
Re: Bury Pool Fence Amendment
31 May 2007
are installed. While there may be some, in the cities we checked (Chanhassen, Minnetonka,
Eden Prairie, Plymouth and Maple Grove), none allowed the pool covers as an alternative to
fencing. Two of the ordinances we explored referenced alternatives to fencing (e.g. buildings
and walls). However in discussing pool covers with their staffs, the common response was
concern that nothing guarantees that the pool will be closed whenever the pool is not in use.
With respect to the pond being recognized as a barrier in lieu of the fence, there are also issues.
First, the pond can be subject to fluctuation in level. Since the fence can not be placed in a
wetland, there is no way to ensure that someone can not get around the fence when the water is
low. Further, there is some indication that previous owners of the property may have altered the
wetland boundary. As shown on Exhibit E, the wetland area adjoining the open water ends
abruptly at the applicants' lot. Relative to providing an area for wildlife coming up from the
pond, there is nothing that requires the fence to immediately abut the pond. The fence could be
placed further east of the pond if that is the concern.
The concern of obstructing view is not uncommon. However, the applicants' property drops off
toward the pond. The terrace is shaped such that a fence placed at the toe of the first drop would
place the fence approximately four feet below the level of the pool deck. Also, there are fences
that are less obtrusive than others that blend better into the landscape. These are frequently used
by lakeshore owners concerned with their views of the water.
The issue of swimming pool fences was last discussed in 2003 and in 1995 before that. In both
instances, the provisions regarding pool fencing was upheld. In fact, the consensus in 1995 was
that nonconforming pool fences should be brought into conformity. Shorewood's current
requirements are well-founded in concern over safety. As such, it is recommended that no
change be made to the Code at this time.
Cc: Craig Dawson
Tim Keane
Blair and Sharon Bury
-2-
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
..J
0-
~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~ ....-
~ ~
~
~ ~
~ z 0
0
l!)
~ ~
~
~ 0
l!)
N
~ ~
0
~
C'I:S
aJ
s:::
3:
o
.....
.s:::
.....
.-
C'I:S
.::.::
s:::
o
.....
Q)
s:::
s:::
:E
Q)
.::.::
C'I:S
...J
Exhibit A
SITE LOCATION
Bury - Zomng Text Amendment
E
en
't
MD~
30
III
ET
60
I
--
4. /....
0'"
wEE
C!:J~
fiJ~
/
5:
o
o
OJ
".
l.i..
2fJ~
O 0/1
~C
Q. ~. '5.
4J!g /
i;j;;} ,,~ (
~ ;'
$ cory/,'
^o ~. / I
^-.\ CV . I
0J "/ ~
/.::J
/p
/.::)~
/ "
/
/
o
o
o
I"-
....-
=--------
~ - s-x.?
---~-~~
'j ',' '.,
\T\ (\
U L_V \
. 2 ~"~".",,,.
\:;;p'
- ---
- - k~
~ ./~
- ::ov
,,;!;/
/9
./
I
I
-1)
IJJ
':1:
o
_....-'- f
.--'--'-~"
IJJ
:I:
o
Exhibit B
PROPERTY SURVEY
Before pool
943
----
944
=-----945
946
-
th
r-
..' <:i
~
-',... ..
'\.' ;-=:fu-I9..1S' ~... 1"1 ~\
I I I , ,." \ C5' ~ '0',lS..." ~~
1 I I I '0 ....,,, U' 61
/ I ) \..IS..IS r'-.~,. ". ...
' , I I I (5' \ '-1 "...... \ '.
' I, <> '", . "'"
/ I' , ';l, _ "", \ 1!.1:)" " '. ,
' , ;' , , I I, \' \ \ ,,~,:, _ _ _ "_
I I I I I , " , , ,\ , \, '~D "-
J /1 '. f I i I I' '....... \ , \ \ , _
I I, " I. '" ) '" ,
r i / / /1 I ',' \ ' , \ , , '-'J:=,
f , · I I I I \ \, _"mnoe '~,
I' ! , I I ", \ ,
r6 rO r6 , I!! ", '" '..
" " "(j "", I, _ ". ',,_ _ "
/ ": ':' OJ fJ ti ~ i f ~ 1,~:=:-~:~~",~\*t1:i~~~,
' /, I I I I , , , _ "1 / ,',' I__:::::~... \......---=-~....:.. .~~_~"~
/ ; I I / I I , i , " " "-'LF6"-~--""" ~
1 / / / /1 / II f J HOI1lNOO , :,p':, d ":' .. ~ '" ,
I I I / / ''"'X3, "', '" :,p,
/ / I I I I I 1'! f, ,?' ",.
I / 1 1 I / / 1 'I:P,,.,
./ .' I / 'I !, .. ,~, ,
/ 1 1 I R:i /7' '0)"
1 / Ii I , I I / . ,< l ,', "
l I / I /. 'U , " ,
" ',. / , "'.. 'r
/ / / 1,,1 / I ,/ HOO,"Oo , (dO"),~,
I I' I I 1,1 I / . ",", , >0'" ,
/, II', / / ''''
I / ../ I / .1/ .r / J/ ~,I " / / "
I~ / "I, ~, , ,
I --- / "'U1 / , '.-- C'v6-.~ ,__, I
' I / .' '/"" .__ . ,',," ,
'1, I , 'y L-,' / ,,' ,""
' , I , I, "'f /""'- I / ""
. I ;' I / i,l - )\</~ vt6-.......,,/ / "
I I I I I / I I ,__ ,'\,,','
1,. I I I I I, , ,- _""
. J'; , I I I, I I I )~ ,;~_ -' \ ,
I / I I I / , I / " "I
'/ I " I f I I ;' / I !.,/ ,\
I , I' I I { I I I / ,~, / i
' f I' I I I I , I I . ,\ '\
"'1'111 I,. I " ",",:,
I /I {" (, I , , .......,
I . I I I !' I , I : :. :) '\
I I I " II i I I , , "
/ I I I I I I " " .
I I I \ I I I , '. ,'. ,
\ \ I \ I 1 \ Ii " ", \1 ,i
/ I 1 \ '\ I, \ .1 h. I \ f"
/ I , I . I " I \" " I
.,.. "/' . II I I '\ , , " "
/ I I I", I '. ",
I " I \ I " , <& "
I I "", I , "')1 \
I \f3"c1~ a3GpOMl\ ' ", I'%, ... \ '.
) I \ I', , , , \
J \ \ \ \ c:1' \ \ <'. I
I \ c:1' \ \) I
I "~ '" , , ,
I I,~" " '; ,
../ 6.,.... "a> 0;> \\ \ i J' \
I "';l;., " '..-'
/'" 0:> I I \ \ I \
;. \ I \
.--/ '" \ \ I \
.' / / I I : : " f ----"''1 "
' / I I I ),'
/ / I "",.
_/ ~ " I ',' , "".J.__-'
/~ ~/ / , I,' ,
/ , / //, " ,~-_.~
' - / ,;, / / " " 0 -
- / -' / '-"
-" " ~ '.
\
ee'sel>
3.90,90. pss
S 335-
IWW1r>1
'1000 ~ f\J
J.I'~
.3l-ON
,
.Fond
~..
,
.....---
,J' "\ .
' .' - - 0 ,6 - -- -.... ( " ) _
----- ~- ~-
- - - - , " . I~-
' . . . \.:....~--
"~--
,.,
---.I
~:
./
.', .?
__.gl>.C?J -
.-
"
"
"
,
l
/
;'
1/
,.'
I
/
/
/
I
.,1/
1
"
,
j,
,
,
,
----..........::..
..6',lS.
. . <Y.,
'I.
\
'I.
~
,
\
-- "" / II
1'.......... "-11
\ .....,.,;(--.
--I-;:'.~'...... II
". -',.ll
\/__...1._/1\
r"..... 1./
I ---2::. >l( _ -11-
--I ./ I ..........1\
1:::::::'
o
. 'l'""
I
I.
/
I
/
/
(,L" Lv6) "H-,~-
,)1030
71
r 7f, / I
\ II I \ I ,
\ ::'/-'
- ::'1- -1- 1\ --,
1 /\ I I 'I. I
\ I \ I I '"":
'I \k.__g
~--- 0:>
I
,
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
/
I
I
'"
\ " "
\, "
)' "
,\ I'.
J. \ I
. / , ,
I \ . ,/,
fl.., .', CO
:it \ '<:J-
;" \ p.i
I \ I
I \ I
r y
, 1\
I I 'I.
'. 1 \
I I
I ,
"\ I 1
I\, I
J '\ I
/ " /
.....1
" Pp
, (5'"
,.
/
.' .I ,.,
..../~>,.. "
V ^ ," / /
/ \.., .' ,. ..' ."
.....'..., " " .
/
/
~fl..,
C~
/
.~
~
:"0
/.-
/ \. ./
;' d.)/
/ /
/ /'\.
~/ ~
-I ~ /
/';, -0"
/ ~
,....?
,.' R.."
4~
/ "./
'"
'"
"/ ".
,/
,/
"
/'
,,-
,,"
.I
..-
,.r-
,.
.'
.'
/
"
/.
.".
,/
/
../
,-
",,-
,/
/
-
"
.-
....
-
"
,"
/
-- - iiO'5~~
- NUlOZ)'.6BS
..
" (!-
/---'if , . ') i - "
')'"'~~' ~ '. . (>..,.~ \
~ ~ '" ~ 'mID,'."'" '.. _~
dr '0'" "': ,"0 'WM "'~ . -;
, , '"' , . .
I ".....\"
f:piS' :a. \', _ ",
'- 01. \ ....'....._......
'.,'.....- I. \ .... , .....". ,,/
- , ~"-'" /
: '--,~,... '" ,,:::' ;;\11///
: . r~ -', ,,\ '--, ...,..,.," ,\ \ \ 11/ Ii;:;: 'I" 11' ".,:: <~
' , I. " _ '0<\ ,_ "_~;:-
'. 1 )' ~', ", ',' ,,_, '>l-r--t
-~' t' - -~ , \, h O\,:~~>, ~ ~ ," c- \.e., J~~~ \'4-I~~:(;: + c: == if f).H~ 1//
J '.... \:,..i,
I...., "
I
I
In."nn
/
,
.........
--
"
../
-
....
,-
-
.--
...-
"
-
,-
/...
/
/.
.--
.--
/
-
./
../
...
.--
....
....
~
.--
./
.--
,.
....-
....
-
-
...
.... ....
- ....
-- - 105.3 ...... .....
-
....
-
-
,.-/
"
....
....
.--
.--
/
-
--:::=-
230~56 - r----...,_
- J . t,
Exhibit B
--
~'........_-
--
\76-'-
vv6 --
....
"
....
Exhibit CAN
SITE PL
WIth pool
--
,-'
/
Reason for request: We would like the city to amend the ordinance requiring fencing the
entire parameter of our swimming pool. In this particular case, we don't feel it enhances
safety to fence the edge of a mucky private pond. You would have to go around the
fence, swim on a muddy bottom of the pond, and then fight the pool cover in order to get
in.
With today's technology in safety the times have changed; we are installing an automatic
pool cover, which can hold the weight of an elephant when it is closed and not in use.
Even with the pool cover open, the fence and the pond secure the entire pool. Several
Twin Cities communities have eliminated fencing all together because of this new
technology.
We would like to eliminate fencing only on the pond shoreline on our property. Our
intent is to fence up to the water line on both sides ofthe property. The pond lies within
Boulder Bridge Association property and is enclosed by woods on the south side. The
turtles and wildlife can still rest on the shoreline, however eliminating any trespassers and
still retaining the beautiful view we've come to love in Shorewood.
Thank you,
Blair and Sharon Bury
Exhibit D
APPLICANT'S REQUEST LETTER
Exhibit E
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
FENCING REQUIREMENTS FOR POOLS IN
NEIGHBORING LAKE MINNETONKA CITIES
CITY OF ORONO NO FENCING REQUIREMENTS
DEEPHA VEN NO FENCING REQUIREMENTS
MINNETONKA BEACH NO FENCING REQUIREMENTS
TONKA BAY DO NOT NEED TO FENCE WATER (NATURAL PERIMITER)
MOUND VARIANCE IN 06 TO FENCE TO WATERS EDGE
WAYZATA FENCE PERIMETER ONLY TO WATER'S EDGE
~ 0 'brV\., -\--\- ~ d b'1 0fP l ~ e-d 1(\1 7
Cover-Pools :satety
r clot; 1 VI. ..:..
HOME I THE COliER-POOLS SYSTEM I THE COliER-POOLS ADIIAJHi'.GE I COVER-POOLS CO\
A COVER-POOLS COVER SAVES LIVES.
MENU
Pool covers offer numerous benefits for swimming pool owners. As a safety device, the
cover acts as a horizontal fence. completely sealing off th(3 pool and preventing
accidental access to the pool water. Our pool covers are so convenient and easy to
use, they can be more effective than other swimming pool safety devices or covers. In
seconds, the cover slides across the pool, creating a life-saving safety barrier between
a child and the pool water. Cover-Pools encourages layers of protection when
considering swimming pool safety.
SA,FETY
SiWING M
CONVENIE
ENERGY E
PI1~JEVE!'n iOROWlI'UW~G WITlrl THE lUll TJiM!UE Su:\IFET'f !BARRIER.
With a Cover-Pools cover you get peace of mind at the
simple turn of a key. In under a minute your pool is
easily covered or uncovered. Your Cover-Pools cover
acts as a horizontal fence for your pool. preventing
access by children, pets and uninvited visitors. And
'1vhils there's no substitute for proper supervision. your
pool can be protected even when you're not around, It's a safety barrier that no
pool, new or existing, should be without.
iiliA>{JtMIUlI!'Ji SAfETY
Cover-Pools
C:J''/ers are
certified to eyceed the
requirements of the f.\,merican
which sets
fm Testing and Materials
sta.ndards for
co'/ers
http://wvvw.coverpools.com/pool_ covers/benefits/safety.j sp
6/5/2007
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD' SH~REWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927' (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128' www.cl.shorewood.mn.us . cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator
June 7, 2007
2007-2028 CIP for Excelsior Fire District
The Shorewood and Deephaven city councils approved the proposed 2007 -2028 Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) of the Excelsior Fire District, with the deletion of $35,000 for
technology in 2008 and with a reduction of the capital transfers from $170,000 to $155,000 in 2008.
As it acted on the proposed CIP, the Shorewood City Council indicated it would consider further
action when such information might be presented. Following these actions, the EFD Board
authorized a consultant study to identify the needs, probable costs, and schedule of improvements in
the technology area.
Brand Networking (for computer equipment) and AIS (imaging) provided analysis and a proposed
schedule for improvements. Brand Networking identified $37,800 in computer improvements
through the end of2008, and AIS identified alternatives ranging from $7,900 to $12,600 for the
purchase of copiers. There was no evaluation of the proper fit of imaging equipment and computer
equipment.
The EFD Board reviewed the reports during its meeting on May 30, 2007, meeting. In its
discussions, Board members noted that the sum of the improvements was greater than the $35,000
proposed for the CIP in 2008. They commented that several key decisions would need to be made
(e.g., to move more toward a laptop-pc environment with less reliance on desktop pc's), refinements
made on the timing of acquisitions, and whether imaging equipment should be leased or purchased.
For purposes of capital budgeting, however, Board members believed that the $35,000 amount for
2008 was appropriate, reasonable, and justified. They noted that the challenge would be to staff and
themselves to refine the improvements identified for optimal effectiveness within that amount.
The EFD Board has requested that Shorewood and Deephaven city councils consider their actions
again on the proposed 2007-2028 CIP, and to approve it as proposed with $35,000 for technology and
$170,000 in capital transfers for 2008. On June 4, 2007, the Deephaven City Council continued its
consideration of the matter as its member on the Board, Kim Crockett, was unable to be in
attendance. The city councils of Excelsior, Greenwood, and Tonka Bay have approved the CIP as
proposed.
#.
'..J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Excelsior Fire District
Technology Plan
Prepared by Jimmy Brand
Brand Networking
May 2007
Excelsior Fire District
Technology Plan
The objective of this technology plan is to provide the Excelsior Fire
District, which operates through a joint powers agreement with the cities of
Deephaven, Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood and Tonka Bay, with a
projected 5-year technology budget. In absence of a formal technology
budget during the past administration, the District is facing a substantial
computer network upgrades over the next few years. A documented and
budgeted maintenance and upgrade plan will assist staff in addressing the
District's future technology needs.
This plan was developed in cooperation with Jimmy Brand of Brand
Networking, Fire Chief Scott Gerber and discussions with Fire District
personnel. We revisited the 2003 initial network installation, the current
status of the system, and the future technology needs of the District.
Consultant Back2round
Jimmy Brand has owned and operated Brand Networking since 1989.
Formerly a CPA with Price Waterhouse and business consultant, Jim has
extensive background and systems experience on local area networks.
Brand Networking has long term relationships with neighboring police and
fire departments including Mound Fire Department, Mound Police
Department, South Lake Minnetonka Police Department, West Hennepin
Public Safety Department and the West Metro Drug Task Force.
History with Public Safety-Police & Fire
Brand Networking has maintained the South Lake Minnetonka Police
Department computer network for many years and has access to the secure
computer environment. Jim had a working relationship with Will Lee who
initially setup the Excelsior Fire District network in 2003. Jim assisted the
District after Will's departure on minor conversion tasks and updates.
Scope of Plan
The technology aspect of municipal agencies is quite diverse which can
include computer networks, specialized reporting and database software,
mobile phones and PDA's, pagers, digital cameras, copiers, printers and the
like. The scope of this technology plan only concerns the local area network
needs which details computer hardware and software. Network printing
issues will be addressed under separate cover for the planned copier
upgrades which will provide for all workgroup printing.
Funding Historv
It appears that computer network maintenance has not been a line item
budget since the network's inception in late 2003. Per discussions with
staff, computer purchases and maintenance have been made in limited
amounts due to the fact of non-budgeted expenditures and the assistance of
volunteer support. In 2006 a networking firm with local ties had assisted the
District in firewall installation and networking of Station #2. It is imperative
that the District has a budgeted funding source for their technology needs
and a maintenance plan in effect for future years.
Proposed Budget
Please refer to the attached spreadsheet which details each computer's basic
configuration, status and upgrade budget. Projections are based on
reviewing data with District staff and network consultant experience. An
Aprillih technology memorandum prepared by Fire Chief Gerber was also
utilized in providing detail with respect to the District's computer system.
Maintenance costs on older equipment can be quite high and experience
dictates that by having an upgrade plan the District can save maintenance
dollars by replacing equipment at projected intervals.
Status of Current Network
Overall the state of affairs on the District's computer network is considered
operational but is lacking a maintenance and replacement plan. The main
file server functions fine at present but will not handle the proposed
upgrades and desired level of functionality required by several new software
upgrades.
Many of the workstations are showing signs of age with speed issues and
lack of resources. Some immediate memory upgrades can increase
performance on several of the workstations, but overall the workstations
would be rated fair to poor. Frustration levels are seemingly high among all
staff personnel with respect to many computer technology issues.
A large portion of the projected 2008 technology plan is to upgrade the
client workstations to powerful business desktops that have a longer
projected life. An updated file server is also recommended in 2008 due to
current limitations on size and age as the current system will not operate
effectively during the next few years if replaced during 2010 budget year.
Staff Concerns on Current Network
Jimmy Brand met with members of the District to discuss the computer
network technology and its effect on current staff and volunteers. Their
comments are sorted by subject matter with Brand Networking
recommendations in red parentheses:
Connectivity
./ DSL link to Deephaven location via fIrewall is very slow;
[Need to upgrade ISP service level in order to provide faster
throughput]
./ Wireless LAN is not dependable and concerns about wireless
security; [Notebook and access point updates should help fix
issues; Also, wireless security plan should be followed and
documented]
File Server
./ Disk storage of 36Gb is undersized for the District's growth
and for utilization of an Exchange mail server;
./ Tape backup procedures are not in effect to systematically
backup critical data on a daily basis; [Tape drive in file server
and related software are more than adequate to provide daily
backup; Need daily administrative procedure to insure data is
archived properly]
./ Operating system software and manuals are not present and
cannot be accounted for;
./ Single processor server is lacking in power to drive a Microsoft
Small Business Server 2003 installation which includes
Exchange mail; [Dual processor CPU with RAID 5 disk anays
will provide speed and data fault tolerance for long term use]
Workstations
./ Little reliability in many of the workstations primarily due to
age and resources; [Life cycle of desktops should be at four
years or less; Some current pc's can have inexpensive memory
upgrades as a temporary fix]
./ Simple tasks like burning a CD cannot be done; [Appears that
some staff bring projects home to complete as frustration level
is high]
Notebooks
./ Current notebooks are too old and too slow which results in
inefficiencies and lack of portability; [Useful1ife on notebooks
should be three years or less]
./ Notebooks should be available for community education and
emergency response
Support
./ Absence of support personnel make it difficult for staff and
volunteers to remedy problems on a timely basis; Many issues
stay unresolved for months; Volunteer support has been helpful
and appreciated but cannot always solve problems on a timely
basis; [1-laving an on-call IT consultant should resolve most
major issues on a timely basis]
Software
./ Network antivirus software has expired and no maintenance
contract updated; [This is a mission critical tas.k in order to
provide file server and desktop antivirus protection
immediately]
./ Compatibility issues between older versions of Office still
exist; [Difficult and expensive to update every station for cach
new release; A computer replacemcnt program should fix these
problems as older pc's are recycled]
./ Updated version of Firehouse Software needs to be purchased
and installed; [Outdated version exists and needs to be updated
for training and equipment modules]
Speed
./ Many workstations are lacking memory resources which
accounts for lack of speed; Some of these workstations can be
upgraded
Web Site
./ Web site is not functional at present time; [This site can be a
valuable tool for community resource]
Security
./ Need to provide login security for network access and change
of passwords; [Documentation of network security is
mandatory and procedures followed to maintain secure access
to data]
./ Disaster recovery plan is not present with respect to network
data
./ Facility sharing with South Lake Police; [Internet bandwidth is
only shared resource on computer network; Police Department
has a controlled environment and not feasible for cost sharing at
this time]
Email
./ Currently there is no remote access to email from outside the
office; [Exchange mail server will address this issue for
accessing mailboxes from any internet connection in the world]
./ Junk mail problem is significant with many users getting tons
of spam in their mailboxes on a daily basis; [Spam filtering can
be purchased from an outside party; These filtering systems can
tie directly into the Exchange mail server and provide a reliable
and friendly mail system to all users]
./ Simple tasks like Out-of-Office assistant cannot be performed
./ Interoffice email needs to be routed outside of District;
[Exchange mail server will fix issue of interoffice mail]
Printing
./ Multiple inkjet desktop printers are slow and expensive to
operate; [Need to address networked laser copiers to improve
speed and curb ink costs]
./ Report printing is slow on inkjet printers [\\7 orkgroup printing
to copiers will alleviate problem]
./ Copiers are outdated and not networked;
Fax
./ Quality of faxes is poor due to age of fax machine
Organization
./ Very little has been done over the past few years to maintain
organization of data files or purging of unnecessary data;
./ Contacts and calendars not shared; [Setting up Exchange server
will allow for Microsoft Outlook public contacts and calendars
to be shared for etliciency and accuracy]
Accounting
./ Currently all bookkeeping is performed outside of the office;
Many joint power organizations keep their own books which
are subject to audit; [Staff would like to obtain a multi-user
QuickBooks program for daily accounting; District can obtain
financial and budget comparison information 011 an immediate
basis]
Training
./ Too much technology with no training budget is a concern;
[Many fire and police department users are not computer
wizards and technology poses a challenge without adequate
training]
Technology Improvements
./ Air cards will be needed for network connectivity for the four
truck notebooks installed through the grant program
./ Future software requests;
o PrePlan-Fire district planning for business and industry
o Hazardous Materials-Chemical information for
hazardous materials mitigation
GIS mapping-Computerized mapping software
o Firehouse software-Purchase upated modules for
training and equipment
./ Additional digital cameras should be budgeted as only one
camera is available at each location;
./ Voice recording could be a useful tool to save typing time and
provide accuracy; [Staff can record on site and translate into the
network when back at office]
Implementation Strategy
The projected budget depicts a 2008 purchase of seven desktop workstations
and two notebooks. A common strategy is to place the newest workstations
in locations which require the most horsepower [i.e. Dispatch, Fire Chief,
Support Staff, and Inspectors]. The current workstations at these locations
would then be rolled out to other locations [i.e. Officers, Relief Association].
The proposed file server upgrade would include the installation of Exchange
mail server which will provide a reliable interoffice and external email
system for the District. The Exchange installation will allow for staff to
have shared contact and calendar information for increased efficiency and
remote email access from other locations. This is especially important in a
volunteer organization such as the Fire District and for ease of use in an
email driven society.
Summary
In a technology business where the world seems to practically change
overnight with respect to equipment and cost, we prepare technology plans
on the basis of our best approximation of future costs and direction of the
customer. Most government agencies cannot always afford the latest and
greatest technology but we must attempt to provide an upgrade path so we
can alleviate large unbudgeted outlays while providing staff with a
reasonably efficient and enjoyable workplace.
Considering the size and layout of the facility, discussions with District staff
and overall observations, I believe that the quantity of installed workstations
at present is adequate. Also, notebook computers are not good substitutes
for workstation desktops on a long term basis.
Computer networks are constantly in a growth phase primarily due to
technological enhancements in industry software and relatively short-term
equipment obsolescence. These networks cannot manage themselves and
therefore a support mechanism must be established to resolve issues and
provide routine maintenance. As can be gathered from my analysis and
discussions with District staff, the technology issues that face us today are
pretty severe. My process during this plan has encountered an aging
network, poor response times, outdated equipment and high frustration
levels. We need to consider a sizable budget for 2008 in order to remedy
some of the problems that should have been resolved during prior years and
to provide future technology improvements to the system.
Q)
o
e:
(\l
e:
Q)
.....
e:
'cu
:2E
ca
Q)
...
..... (\l
Q) ==
Cl':;::
" 0
tili5 en
'i: " ~
1ii .s (\l
.- 0 ==
CQ)"
~.o ~
u:::il:J:
... ... ...
o (\l Q)
,- Q) .....
.!!! >- g"
~ OJ E
>< .::: 0
wu..()
0 0 gl~ .~
..... 0
....~ , 0_
...." C'? C': C"
o ::l , .'... ,.
NC)
,',',,' "',,.
I-- -t-' i-- l! i~
0 0 00 0 0 '~ 0
..... L{) L{) L{) L{) L{) 0 0
O~ L{) L{) L{) L{) L{) 0:> 0 1",.-
...." ..- ..- ..- ..- ...... ..- g '<;j" 1+
o ::l iF
NC)
- - ~
00
..... 0 0
O'l~ 0.<.0
0" C'?
o ::l "f
NC) .
00 a -
0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 0
..... L{) L{) L{) L{) L{) L{) L{) 0 00 0 0 00 0 0
CIO ~ L{) L{)L{) L{) L{) L{) L{) 0:> O:>.'<;j" 0:> 0 o <.0 0 <.0
- . - r-: c0 0:>-
0" ..- ..- ..- ...... ..- ...... ..- ..- ..- ..-
o ::l
NC) Q)
:!::
- ::l
0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 0 -I~ (f)
Q) L{) L{) L{) L{) L{) 0 0 Q)
..... r- 0 0
.~ ..... !E
,,0 ..- ~
Q)O 0
eN '5
E . r III
I-- - r-- e
E H. u
E E :J E E ro (f) .. ~
c. ro .... -c
ro ro 0 .... ro (f) .... I, -c
... .... .... ro e:
== (f) " ro
(f) (f) -c (f) Q) ~ ~ ~ 0
-c " 0 <1> -c Q) e: e: e: .... m
III Q) <1> "iii Q) Q) e: :J c~ ~ ro
<1> <1> Q) III
::l -- e: -- ~ ..... ::l
..... e: e: -c -- e: -c -c ro I:::: I:::: " .... ..',. ,'.", 0
(\l I:::: .... I:::: 0 .... -c .... I:::: 0 0 0 <1> 0 0 <1> ~
..... ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ & g 0 .... g g <1> Y
en Cl 0) C. 0) e: I-- -' ~
;;0 .; co
~ ~
..Cl ..Cl ..Cl ..Cl ..Cl ..Cl ..Cl ..Cl ..Cl ..Cl ..Cl ..Cl ...:
,0ii 0
E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..Cl ./ .....
<.0 N <.0 N N 0:> N <.0 N 0:> 0:> ..Cl 0:> ~ ..Cl 'c
Q) L{) ..- L{) ..- ..- '<;j" ..- L{) ..- '<;j" N C> N '<;j" C> > H 0
:2E N L{) N L{) L{) '<;j" L{) N L{) '<;j" ..- N ..- <.0 i:::!. -i. .. ~
..... '. 0 ~
N e: (f)
I ro ..... C2
N C> a ...,.,,' 0 "
I ro
C> ~ .c N ;i ~Zi ..Cl
..... C>
N C'? N N ..- .~ I .
N N N N N N
I I I en I I I I N I o N C> ~;. ~.!.
N C> I C> :JI " <.0
C> C> C> C> <.0 C> C> C> <.0 >< 0 C> <1> 0 ~.ii. ::::>
e: ~ (f) a.
~ ~ ~ e ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 N ~ 0:> ro c<) U
::::> N N N N c<) N N C'? C'? ~ <1> ..- en .c e: -e Ii. :gy.
Q) .... e: ~ 0 -c
a. "1 "1 "1 <ii "1 "1 "1 "1 "1 "1 .., 0 "1 s: ~ Q) ro 0 <1> e:
() a... a... a... U a... a... a... a... a... a... a... u a... ~ I (f) a: Q)
~ --
0 - I-- - <1> .r.
0 .!!l 0 :2J
c +-' e: .r.
r- ~ e: ro
C'? ro Q)~ e: ~ <1>
...J in e: a:: 0"5 <1> "
..... (f) ~ ro .Q <1> ..... :J
<1> ~ .... ..... .... e: (f) e: 13
III :E . -c 0) 0 ..... <1> 0 a... (\l e: . Iii .5
- l: ..... ..- N () e: <1> e: C :J l: E <1> 0) e: 0 ~cl
..... .~ (f) <1> (f) .... ro ..... m .s u
0 .... ... ..- N e: ..... ro 0 e: (f)
:;; <1> .r. 0 0 .r. e: .r. (f) Z . Iii .~ (f) I- ::J U .... (f) '.p e: ~ e e:
t :E U 1:5 ..... 0 .Q (f) 0 (f) <( .c <( ,5 0 a... ::l l: .... 0
(\l 0 U u ..... .... m .... ..... <1> .... U ..... .... m 0 :J 'cu 0 ro :;:;
..... <1> <1> ro m <1> <1> I- ==
III C. -' .~ .... .~ I- a... (f) .r. 0 :2E == G> ro
c. c. c. 0 c. 0 :J .....
..:.l: C. <1> (f) ::::: !E .!!l !E <ii ::; <1> <1> <ii 0 III .- :J <1> 0 ID ~ ... .....
... ::l .... (f) (f) (f) (f) ro .: .... a... ::l .2> .... .... 0 ~ 0 C'Cl (f)
0 (f) u.. <( e: e: is CO 0 0 0 a: u.. u.. u:: a: ~ I g.Q. :> u:: <( z U) 3: ~
....
3: ~ ;- e: " 0
..- N C'? '<;j" L{) <.0 r- 0:> en 0 ..- N ..- N C'? r- 0 ==
g. ..- ..- ..- 0 (: l: Q) :;; ...
<.0 ~ cu cu C'Cl
0 ... ~ c.
..0 Q) Cii ..... (\l .... :c 0
s: ..Cl .,f en 0 ~ cu 0 III .....
Q) u .... .... cu Q)~
III .... oS! .!!! ..Cl ..... ..c .... .... (f)
Q) 0 ::l 0 III ::l 0 0 <1>
0 Z u.. :2E en en e: en I- Z O.
~z
~~
~~
u eo:
.- ~
= ~
o I-
r.r.;. .-
~
f"~
:j:I::
::
o
.-
-
~
......
Gf1
.....
u
.-
,:: =
IZl eJ)
.,.... .-
.~ 1Zlt-
~~~
I-~~
._ ~ N
~I->>
I- 0 eo:
.s f ~
..:a ~
~z
~
~
('f) ~
~ >
~ l-
N CIJ
r.r.;.r.r.;.
=~
r.r.;. .-
~
1111111111
111111111
~
:j:I::
=
o
.-
.....
eo:
.....
r.r.;.
document management
advanced imaging solutions
Prepared Exclusively For
Excelsior Fire District
PREP ARED BY:
Ryan Keating
Account Manager
(952) 930-1882
May 24, 2007
rkeating@ais-nln.cOln
Current Situation, Executive Summary, and Proposed Solution.f()f
Excelsior Fire District
Current Situation
The Excelsior Fire District us currently utilizing old, outdated products for their digital print/copy
situation. The Excelsior Fire District is using hand me down Sharp copiers that were at one time state of
the art, but are now nine and ten year old products that are stalting to become unreliable devices, and
causing more down time as time passes. The Excelsior Fire District is currently not utilizing networked
multi-function products, and instead is using separate small consumer type printers and fax machines for all
of their printing and faxing needs. These consumer grade products can be very slow and unproductive and
can be extremely costly to service and supply.
Executive Sunul1ary
The copier world has changed from quite a bit since the Excelsior Fire District last looked at their overall
print/copy situation. The current set up of having separate copy, fax and print solutions is no longer the
recommended set up for office environments. The majority of businesses have moved towards utilizing
multi-functioning devices that can handle all of their copy, fax and print needs. Businesses are doing this
for many reasons, the main two being; more productive solutions and less overall cost of ownership.
Current Fire Chief Scott Gerber has done a very nice job envisioning what the Excelsior Fire District
should look like to be the most productive environment for their print, copy, fax solutions, while also
making sure that he is being as cost effective as possible. Advanced Imaging Solutions has partnered with
the Excelsior Fire District for many years, and has been asked to analyze the current situation and help find
a more reliable, productive and cost effective manner of doing business.
Proposed Solution
Advanced Imaging Solutions is proposing that the Excelsior Fire District streamlines their products by
utilizing more productive and cost effective multi-functioning solutions. AIS recommends that the
Excelsior Fire District streamlines their upstairs workgroup area by utilizing one multi-function digital
print/fax/copy/scan solution (either a color or black solution) and that the majority ofthe larger jobs get
sent to this solution. This solution will allow the Excelsior Fire District to be much more productive,
reduce the need for more equipment, and will result in less cost of operation than the current set up. The
reason for sending the majority of the volume to the multi-function solution is because the cost per page on
this solution is on average much less than the current print/fax devices that the Excelsior Fire District is
using. For the downstairs locations AIS recommends that the Excelsior Fire District replaces the Sharp
Ll6l and Lexmark printer with a multi-function copy and print solution. In the communications room, AIS
recommends a small desktop multi-function solution to replace the HP Office Jet multi-function. The
recommended solutions will allow the Excelsior Fire District to move from hand me down copiers and
consumer grade products to multi-function commercial grade solutions that will allow for much less
downtime, more productivity, greater ease of use, stronger reliability, better print quality and less cost of
operation.
r..c:i~-=> .:lii ilu"oril7r}iiOI7 (-'ndosed H'i/ltin this. dOU[}jic'nt is' ciH!!idcn!joj nnd}n.the in/ended U."d; o(E:x{:dsio!' Fire District UHfj.,.
7
ai:s:=J
Proposed Digital Solution For
Excelsior Fire District
document manegement
advanced ImaQlng solUtionS-
Proposed Solution A:
Sh~lrp AR-355N Digital Imager
Print/Copy/Fax/Scan
System Configuration:
. 35 ppm digital imager
. Single pass duplex scanner
. 4 x 500 sheet paper or 2 x 500 + 2,000
sheet paper
. Tray-less dup1exing
. 40 GB HDD-intema1 doc storage
. Envelope feeding capabilities
. Network PCL print ready
. Multitasking processor
. Network scanning-scan to emai1, file,
desktop, Sharpdesk scanning software
. 33.6 modem faxing
System Configuration:
Sharp AR-168D Print/Copy/Fax/Scan
. 16 ppm-600 dpi
. Standard 250 sheet tray
. 50 sheet manual bypass
(up to 8 Y2 x 14)
. 30 sheet document feeder
. 32 MB memory
. 33.6 modem fax
. Network Printing and Scanning
Proposed Solution:
Sharp AR-M355N
Sharp AR-168D
Purchase Price
$9,515
$2,400
36 month lease
$275
$70
48 month lease
$228
$59
Service and Supply contracts:
Sharp AR-M355N 5,000 black impressions x $.011= $55 a month
Sharp AR-168D 2,500 black impressions x $.0192= $48 a month
S'ervice am! Supply includes delivery, set-up, network connection, training on the equipment as configured
above and full service maintenance including all parts, labor, supplies, and toner, excluding paper and
staples. All impressions are billed rate set above.
C~iily "iii iJ?(UFmtftiol7 encirJsed wi/i!in this dOCU/!it'lii r<.: cOJ{!hlcNt;U! ond.fiu' (he in/cnded use (~rE~rL'e!sj(}j' Fire Di5:lric/ ()Ii~r. 8
a~=>
Proposed Digital Solution For
Excelsior Fire District
document managemant
----S'dvar:;c;e;dimeging. solutiarls----.
Proposed Solution B:
Sharp AR-350N Digital Imager (newly
refurbished) Print/Copy/Fax/Scan
System Configuration:
. 35 ppm digital imager
. Single pass duplex scanner
. 4 x 500 sheet paper or 2 x 500 + 2,000
sheet paper
. Tray-less duplexing
. Envelope feeding capabilities
. Network peL print ready
. Multitasking processor
. Network scanning-scan to email, file,
desktop, Sharp desk scanning software
. 33.6 modem faxing
System Configuration:
Sharp AR-168DPrint/Copy/Fax/Scan
. 16 ppm-600 dpi
. Standard 250 sheet tray
. 50 sheet manual bypass
(up to 8 1'2 x 14)
. 30 sheet document feeder
. 32 MB memory
. 33.6 modem fax
. Network Printing and Scanning
Proposed Solution:
Sharp AR-M350N
Sharp AR-168D
Purchase Price
$5,500
$2,400
36 month lease
$162
$70
48 month lease
$137
$59
Service and Supply contracts:
Sharp AR-M350N 5,000 black impressions x $.011= $55 a month
Sharp AR-168D 2,500 black impressions x $.0192= $48 a month
Service ([nd Suppl)' includes delivery, set-up, network connection, training on the equipment as configured
above and full service maintenance including all parts, labor, supplies, and toner, excluding paper and
staples. All impressions are billed rate set above.
(~~~ :'Iii il'!/ilnnuiiol7 cncilJ:w:d lviI/iiI! this rloC/.IJift'l7! ii', cl)j~/idcl;!i({! nndf(F (he inft:'nrfcd use (~.rL\L'elsjl!r Fire Di,\'lrit'/ un!y 9
a~-=:>
Proposed Digital Solution For
Excelsior Fire District
c::JOCUr::r::'.~t _'::!:1.!:l.'::18Q.~rT1ent_
. .- advanced imaging solutions
Proposed Solution B:
Konica Minolta C-350 Black & Color
Printer/Copier/Scanner (newly refurbished)
System Configuration:
. 22 ppm Full Color
. 35 ppm Black & White
. True 600 x 600 dpi (Scanning/Printing)
. Up to 12 x 18 paper
. 1 x 250 sheet universal paper cassette
. 1 x 500 sheet paper cassette
. 100 sheet Reversing automatic document
feeder
. 150 sheet bypass
. Tray-less duplexing
. Network Scanning-scan to email, file,
desktop
. PCL Network Printing
:\
q
-:'\i
r _
-
~'~::~,~~
,\ -~
L'I 1',11..'
.
'~
L
System Configuration:
Sharp AR-168D Print/Copy/Fax/Scan
. 16 ppm-600 dpi
. Standard 250 sheet tray
. 50 sheet manual bypass
(up to 8 Y2 x 14)
. 30 sheet document feeder
. 32 MB memory
. 33.6 modem fax
. Network Printing and Scanning
Proposed Solution:
Konica Minolta C350
Sharp FO-DC-535
Sharp AR-168D
(fax Image is on page 11)
Purchase Price
$8,500
$1,700
$2,400
36 month lease
$246
$49
$70
48 month lease
$204
$41
$59
Service and Supply contracts:
Konica Minolta C350 5,000 black impressions x $.011= $55 a month, color x $.10 a page
Sharp AR-168D 2,500 black impressions x $.0192= $48 a month
(fax machines do not have a service agreement)
Service and SlIpp!r includes delivery, set-up, network cOlmection, training on the equipment as configured
above and full service maintenance including all parts, labor, supplies, and toner, excluding paper and
staples. All impressions are billed rate set above.
Cii~-=> /Iii it?/nrmr..ffiol7 ~~..nciiJsed Ivithin flti.I.' dOCUIJ/i;.'fI! is cIJil/idcJlfid! nnrlj;'Ji" {he in/ended usr; (~rL>:c'clsi{'r Fire f)iSlricf ()Ji~j:. 10
aID
dooument management
-.--.BdVS.r;csd-im-egTngeOlutlon-e-..----.
System Configuration:
Sharp FO DC-535
. 33.6 Kbps G3 modem
. MH, MR, MMR, JBIG
Compression
. 4.7" Tilting screen
. Scan speed 1.3 sec per page
. 2 second per page transmission
. Standard 750 sheet paper capacity
. 50 sheet document feeder
. 8 MB flash memory
. Duplex scan ability
. 59 One-touch rapid dials
. 100 coded speed dials
Proposed Digital Solution For
Excelsior Fire District
Manufacturers
We partner with the very best to bring you best in the industry. Sharp and Konica Minolta
are some of the top manufactures worldwide.
I<ONICA MINOLTA
Ci'~:==> Ali il~iurf!!:J!io!7 cnc!o.":ed \viihin this dOCUl!if.'ii! is clIJ!!rdcn!hd nnd.f;If' tfw jl1/t.:'nr/cd IIse o/r.:r:c'e!sim' Fir!? Dislricl Ulif\'. 11
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD. SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927' (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128' www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us
Celebrating 50 Years. 1956 - 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Brad Nielsen
DATE:
7 June 2007
RE:
Noise Regulations
FILE NO.
City Code (Chapter 500)
Having received a resident complaint regarding noises emanating from maintenance
equipment at the Minnetonka Country Club, Councilmember Callies has asked staff to
address our current regulations relative to the control of noise.
Noise is regulated under two sections of the City Code - Section 5D1.05 Subd. 6. (Nuisances)
and Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.m. (Zoning). Both ofthese sections refer to Minnesota Code of
Rules 7030, which are the Mimlesota Pollution Control Agency noise regulations. These
regulation deal primarily with decibel levels and set forth standards for daytime and
nighttime activity. Shorewood applies these rules where we receive complaints involving
sustained levels of noise (e.g. HV AC systems are the most common culprits).
Certain land use activities for which noise presents an issue are controlled by Section 1201.03
Subd. 2.t. (Zoning - Business Hours), and in some cases the conditional use permit process
can include provisions relative to noise. The Shorewood Village/CUB Foods case is a good
example.
Finally, we attempt to control noise generated by property development and construction
activities through the land use and building pennit processes. Our standard development
agreement, or example, will state that constructions hours are limited to the following hours:
M-F: 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M.
Sat.: 8:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M.
Sun.: No construction without prior approval of City Engineer
,ll-
t ~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
....
Memorandum
Re: Noise Regulations
7 June 2007
These same hours are imposed with building permits. It is worth noting that this has been the
City's policy - there is no written code setting forth these hours. As a policy, enforcement
has been an issue on occasion. The Police Department, for example, will not write tickets
when an ordinance is not being violated. Nevertheless, the policy has worked reasonably
well. We have an agreement with the police that they will investigate complaints and advise
us of problems. Often times the police just stopping by is enough for contractors to adjust
their activities. In other cases, contractors concemed about delayed permit processing or
inspections (while we are spending our time responding to the complaint) are generally
cooperative.
What our current code and policy do not address are "untimely" noises - lawn mowers, leaf
blowers, loud music, power tools, etc. Nor do our rules address types of noises. In a recent
complaint we found the subject property to be in compliance with decibel levels, even though
the noise being generated had a very amloying pitch.
The City has discussed noise regulations in the past, opting not to codify the current policies.
Part of the reason for not doing so is that whatever regulations are adopted apply to residents
as well as contractors or businesses.
If the Council thinks it is time to formalize our current policies and strengthen our codes,
staff should be directed to research other codes and come back with a draft amendment. Any
such amendment should involve the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department relative to
enforcement issues.
Cc: Craig Dawson
Tim Keane
-2-
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD' SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927' (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
City Council
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator
Larry A. Brown, Director of Public Works
June 7, 2007
Authorization for Xcel Energy To Place Surcharge for Undergrounding Utility
In County Road 19 Intersection Project
DATE:
SUBJECT:
One of the features of the County Road 19 intersection project was the placement of utility lines
underground. Xcel Energy provided an original estimate of approximately $84,200. It provided a
revised estimate of$169,000 early in the construction process, based on the reality of working in a
tight corridor, encountering other buried utility lines and pipes that were not known to exist, and rain
delays. After its work on the project was completed, Xcel presented a claim for $292,000; staff
balked at the figure. After over a year of negotiations, within the past week Xcel has submitted a
request for $l69,000, plus approximately $20,500 in "carrying charges" in recovering its costs for its
work. Given the reality of the field conditions and the representations made by Xcel at the time of its
revised estimate, staff believes that the $l90,356 total is fair to all parties.
Based on the State regulatory rulings, Xcel is required only to pay for the estimated cost to place
facilities when replacing them. The incremental cost to place facilities underground must be paid
either by (a) the City as a corporate entity, or (b) all of the Xcel ratepayers in the city requiring the
lines to be buried. In (b), the ratepayers pay a surcharge on their Xcel bill until Xcel has recovered
its additional project cost. Other pertinent parts of the rules include:
. The minimum surcharge is $1.00 per month
. The maximum surcharge is $4.50 per month for a residential customer
. Multiple projects may be pooled within the $4.50/month cap, and the minimum surcharge for
anyone project may then be less than $l.OO per month
. The maximum length of time for surcharge of any individual project is five years
Thus, it is important to be strategic about priorities and selecting the duration of surcharges for
individual projects, so that the City is not precluded from requiring underground installation due to
the $4.50/month cap.
Costs for one Xcel project are currently paid by surcharge - for undergrounding along Smithtown
Road from Boulder Bridge south to the City limit. This $1.00/month surcharge should expire at the
end of this year.
,ll-
t ~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
....
Costs for Undergrounding Xcel Utilities - CR 19 Project
June ll, 2007, City Council Meeting
Page 2
When the CR 19 intersection project was begun, it was the Council's expectation that these costs
would be paid through the Xcel surcharge.
Xcel has proposed a 35-month surcharge, which would result in a $ 1. 75/month surcharge for a
residential customer. It has prepared the following chart for all classes of customers:
IExcess Expenditures = $169,000
Customer Class Customers Surcharge Months Recovery
Residential 2,785 $1.75 35 $170,581
Low Income 12 $1.00 35 $420
Small C&I NO 149 $1.75 35 $9,126
Small C&I 39 $5.25 35 $7,166
Large C&I 4 $7.00 35 $980
Street Lighting 10 $1.75 35 $613
Sm Mun Pump NO 18 $1.75 35 $1,103
Small Mun Pump 2 $5.25 35 $368
Large Mun Pump 0 $7.00 35 $0
Total 3,019 $190,356
Total Carrying Charges included in amount recovered $20,512
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed resolution authorizing the monthly
surcharge to Xcel Energy ratepayers in Shorewood for the County Road 19 intersection
project.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 07 -
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A MONTHLY SURCHARGE
TO XCEL ENERGY RATEPAYERS IN SHOREWOOD
FOR THE PLACEMENT OF ITS FACILITIES UNDERGROUND
FOR THE COUNTY ROAD 19/5MITHTOWN ROAD/COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the facilities ofXcel Energy were placed underground as part of the County
Road 19/ Smithtown Road/Country Club Road intersection improvement project during 2005-2006;
and
WHEREAS, the difference in the cost between placing utilities underground and replacing
them overhead is not bome by Xcel Energy, but a determination by the City Council as to the source
of revenue to pay this difference in cost; and
WHEREAS, the City Council may authorize that this cost be paid by a surcharge by Xcel
Energy on all of its ratepayers within the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the proposed terms of the surcharge as follows,
IExcess Expenditures = $169,000
Customer Class Customers Surcharge Months Recovery
Residential 2,785 $1.75 35 $170,581
Low Income 12 $1.00 35 $420
Small C&I NO 149 $1.75 35 $9,126
Small C&I 39 $5.25 35 $7,166
Large C&I 4 $7.00 35 $980
Street Lighting 10 $1.75 35 $613
Sm Mun Pump NO 18 $1.75 35 $1,103
Small Mun Pump 2 $5.25 35 $368
Large Mun Pump 0 $7.00 35 $0
Total 3,019 $190,356
Total Carrying Charges included in amount recovered $20,512
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shore wood that it
authorizes the above monthly surcharge schedule for Xcel Energy ratepayers within Shorewood for
the County Road 19/5mithtown Road/Country Club Road intersection improvement project.
Adopted by the City Council this 11 th day of June, 2007
ATTEST:
Christine Lizee, Mayor
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator/Clerk
Significant Business of the LMCC / 6/11/07
Report to Shorewood City Council
Submitted by
Patrick J. Hodapp
LMCC Executive Committee / Treasurer
6/11/2007
. Call wait time is still an issue for some customers. We are working with
Mediacom to improve the average response time to the required maximum of 30
seconds. There are complications separating call statistics from other services
(e.g. phone and internet, both of which we have no authority to regulate). The
executive committee will be touring the call center in Waseca, MN on June 19th.
All commission members are welcome to attend.
. Mediacom is still negotiating HDTV retransmission rights with CBS. LMCC has
no regulatory authority on this topic, but it remains an important issue to many.
. YTD performance to budget appears to be reasonable.
. New officers were elected at the May Full Commission Meeting. I am still
serving on the Executive Committee as Treasurer.
. Our first full audit (2060 financials) is under way with Abdo, Eick & Meyers.
Historically, year end reviews have been conducted by the same accounting firm
that keeps our books. With the change over of accountants in 2006, a full audit is
both timely and appropriate. Once the audit is complete, we will look closely at
any recommendations for improvements to our internal processes and controls.
. The LMCC Joint Powers Agreement is under review. It is expected this review
will be completed prior to the August Full Commission Meeting. It is our hope to
submit a revised JP A along with the 2008 budget for city approval. The proposed
changes are expected to be relatively minor. Once the new JP A is approved, we
will look at the bylaws and other internal procedures to ensure they are consistent
with the requirements of the revised JP A. Changes to bylaws and other
procedures may be more extensive. First they will be changed to ensure no
conflict with the JP A. Then they will be changed as appropriate to more
accurately reflect current practice.
. Objectives / initiatives during my term as Treasurer:
o Complete transition to new accounting software / accountants (complete)
o Complete full audit (in process)
o Complete JP A review (in process)
o Complete Bylaw review (in process)
o Complete review of internal controls and procedures
HL1ndolA-f b-I/ -D 7